One reason for the surge of public criticism of Israel over the last decade is the increasing interest of American media consumers in the Middle East as U.S. involvement in the region deepened after Sept. 11. The other reason is the triumph of the Internet, which lends itself to anti-Semitic narratives. The genius of the web is its interconnectedness, the facility with which it is capable of making links based on other links, which allows a chain of unbroken and unsubstantiated rumor and innuendo to acquire the stature of fact.

As far back as 2003, David Brooks, writing in the Weekly Standard, was among the first to note the resurgence of anti-Semitism, “the socialism of fools,” in polite conversation, as conspiracy theorists peddled the idea that Jewish-American officials and their colleagues in the media had pressed the United States into making war with Iraq to serve the interests of Israel. From blogs and bulletin boards, Jew-baiting soon entered the mainstream publishing industry, most famously with the publication of Stephen Walt and John Mearsheimer’s The Israel Lobby. The two authors argue that there exists a group of U.S. officials, journalists, and activists—housed at institutions from The New York Times to AIPAC—who intentionally deceived the American public and subverted “true” U.S. interests on behalf of the Jewish state. As reviewers noted, the bulk of the book’s research was based on secondary sources, most of which came from the web.

If not quite as popular as adult-content sites, the anti-Israel blogosphere is a dirty little thrill that major U.S. media outfits have mainstreamed for the masses, the intellectual equivalent of the topless “Page Three” girls that British tabloids use to boost circulation. Among the dozens of blogs and websites obsessed with Israel and the machinations of the U.S. Israel lobby, Phillip Weiss’ Mondoweiss (a project of The Nation Institute), Glenn Greenwald’s blog on Salon, and Stephen Walt’s blog on ForeignPolicy.com (owned by The Washington Post Company) sit atop the junk-heap.

“Whenever one of these guys writes about me, I can tell without having looked at their blogs, because my inbox quickly fills with anti-Semitic invective,” says The Atlantic’s Jeffrey Goldberg, a Tablet Magazine contributing editor and a frequent target of Weiss, Greenwald, and Walt. “Whenever I see a subject line with something like ‘You fascist Zionazi,’ it’s pretty much assured the link in the email will lead back to a post from one of these guys.”*

Some of these bloggers, like Weiss and Andrew Sullivan, were widely published journalists prior to their careers as Jew-baiters. Walt is a different case: A tenured professor of international relations at Harvard, his reputation extended no further than academic circles until The Israel Lobby put him in the middle of the national debate over U.S. Middle East policy. “I wouldn’t consider it a Middle East blog,” Foreign Policy’s managing editor, Blake Hounshell, says of Walt’s work for the site. “He writes about a lot of other things. It’s a regular foreign-policy blog.”

While it is true that Walt covers a wide range of international subjects in his blog, nothing provokes the same amount of reader feedback as his posts about Israel. Last week, a post on the Russian spy scandal received 14 comments; another post during the same period, enumerating what Walt considers the “five big questions about contemporary world politics,” fared a bit better, garnering 53 responses. In the eyes of Walt’s readership, however, those five major issues are dwarfed by the significance of his post concerning the Emergency Committee for Israel, a new pro-Israel organization founded by William Kristol, which was commented on 378 times.

These numbers suggest that the purpose of Walt’s blog is to act as a magnet for the animus of a readership hostile not only to Israel but also to American figures friendly to Israel, especially American Jews. Whether that bothers the owners of The Washington Post or thrills the advertising staff is another question. Jeffrey Goldberg believes that big media companies have morally blinded themselves to the ramifications of using anti-Semitism to attract readers. “I suppose that to the managers of Foreign Policy, traffic is traffic,” Goldberg says. “But in the course of building that traffic they’re surfacing some fairly dreadful invective about Jews. I don’t think they’d be comfortable surfacing the same kind of invective about African-Americans or other groups. But there seems to be a high tolerance for hosting a Jew-baiting blog.”

One explanation for the open sewer of hate that runs through the most prestigious foreign-policy websites is that their editors have become desensitized to opinions they read every day—and that are widely echoed throughout the Arab world and in Europe. In the view of such people, anti-Semitism is simply another common inconvenience of the medium. “As with other sites on the Internet, we certainly don’t feel as though we’ve found a good solution yet to dealing with offensive speech—or, though undoubtedly less importantly, for the annoying spammers who are for some reason insistent on selling our readers ‘Tiffany’ watches, jeans and shoes,” says Susan Glasser, editor-in-chief of Foreign Policy.

While it is difficult and in some cases perhaps undesirable to keep reader-comment sections completely free of insults, racist slurs, paranoid rantings, and threats of violence, it is also the case that some authors and certain subjects, regardless of the author or argument, are more likely than others to stir up the cesspool. Robert Mackey’s The Lede blog at The New York Times serves up a steady diet of Israel-related stories that give hardcore anti-Zionist and anti-Semitic commenters a home at the paper but is energetic in removing the most egregious posts.

Commenters who are shut out at The Lede can find a welcoming home on Lobeblog, hosted by Jim Lobe, a journalist with the IPS News Agency who believes that the roots of the U.S. invasion of Iraq lay not in the White House or the Defense Department, or in U.S. dependence on Arab oil, but in a small neoconservative outfit called the Project for a New American Century, which was supposedly run by American Jews looking to direct U.S. policy on behalf of the Israeli government.

“It hasn’t been secret,” writes Carroll, a commenter on a Lobelog post, that “for a long time that we have a small cabal of US zionist operating in and manipulating the US for their vision of Israel and a group of US Neocons and other assorted special interest who never met a war they didn’t like. … What do we have to do to put an end to them? … Suicide the cabal?” On another post at the same site, a commenter named Rowan Berkeley writes: “It seems to me that it is no exaggeration to say roundly that the USA in its entirety is under Jewish control of one variety or another.” He then makes an entirely accurate observation: “Ten years ago, it would have been a safe assumption that only ‘neo-Nazis’ would say such a thing.”

What is notable about such comments is not that they are original or unusual, but that there are hundreds and thousands of them, each sicker and crazier than the next, appended like a mile-long oil slick to nearly any mainstream news story or opinion piece that mentions Israel. In addition to creating the impression of a wave of popular hatred directed against the Jewish state—an impression belied by polls that show nearly two-thirds of Americans support Israel—the commenters attempt to swamp the news with paranoid anti-Semitic rantings that are entirely detached from even the BBC’s version of reality. On Glenn Greenwald’s Salon blog, there were close to 1,000 comments when the news of the Gaza flotilla incident broke. One commenter took the episode as proof that “The jewish state intends to clean itself of all non-jews. Anything that might slow the starving of the hated ones will be dealt with in the most harsh of terms. This slow-motion genocide/ethnic-cleansing is a horror to witness.” One prominent contributor to Greenwald’s blog, a commenter calling himself Shingo, also appears in the comments section at Stephen Walt’s place, where he manfully exposes Zionist lies: “There is no archeologically and historically evidence that a Jewish state did exist,” he wrote in response to a Walt post.

That comment, along with several dozen others, disappeared from FP.com yesterday, removed by site administrators after I emailed Foreign Policy’s Glasser for comment. “Walt often provokes heated debate with his blog posts, and we are attentive to making sure that offensive comments are taken down,” she later explained in an email.” Many of Shingo’s similarcomments remain live, however. Another typical comment, by a reader named Cal, also disappeared after I contacted Foreign Policy. “[E]njoy your hubris reveling while you can,” he warns, “cause you know whose going to be blamed for all the damage and fallout if there is a US military involvement with Iran or if we spend more blood and treasure on Israel’s war … the ‘Jews are.” The authority that Cal cites for his creepy, conspiratorial worldview is none other than the blog’s author: “[A]s before, Walt is right, has been right. Israel stung the frog, now it’s gonna drown.”

Walt’s readers live through his posts and feed off of the legitimacy bestowed on him by mainstream American cultural institutions—Harvard, which employs him; Farrar, Straus and Giroux, which published his book, and FP.com and The Washington Post Company, which host his blog. Walt and his anti-Israel blogging colleagues have become the respectable face of Jew-baiting. They’re the cesspool’s avatars.

There was a time when American publications could easily ward off the fringe population of semi-literate paranoids and shut-ins who seek admission to mainstream American intellectual life by writing crazy letters. Editors of magazines like The New Yorker didn’t particularly care what their readers had to say (the magazine had no letters section for many years), so long as they kept renewing their subscriptions, and a magazine’s prestige seemed proportionate to the lack of interest it evinced in audience feedback. Being kept in the margins, or shoved there, is the other side of the homespun success story, and no one ever has written better about thwarted American aspiration than Nathanael West. His novel Miss Lonelyhearts is about a newspaper advice columnist driven to despair over the anguished longings of his miserable readers; West’s Day of the Locust is about fringe Hollywood characters who never make the big time, a book that ends in a riot and Los Angeles in flames. What we’re seeing now on the blogs is the obscene marriage of West’s two greatest, and apparently visionary, works: Miss Lonelyhearts’s readers have repossessed the media and redeemed their self-pity and resentment with lead roles in American intellectual life—which they are intent on burning to the ground. Yet even West never dreamed that the proprietors would provide the matches.

“Walt is a throwback to the 1930s,” says Goldberg. “In the ’30s the isolationists rode the Jews as a hobby horse. They tried very hard to marginalize American citizens of the Jewish faith by questioning their loyalty. These guys don’t even understand what ancient terror they’re tapping into. What’s original, what makes this period alarming, is that The Washington Post Company would give a Jew-baiter a platform.”

*A prior version of this article incorrectly suggested that Goldberg was also referring to Andrew Sullivan in the above quote. He was not.

Lee Smith is a senior editor at the Weekly Standard and a senior fellow at the Hudson Institute. He is also the author of the recently published The Consequences of Syria.

WAIT, WHY DO I HAVE TO PAY TO COMMENT?
Tablet is committed to bringing you the best, smartest, most enlightening and entertaining reporting and writing on Jewish life, all free of charge. We take pride in our community of readers, and are thrilled that you choose to engage with us in a way that is both thoughtful and thought-provoking. But the Internet, for all of its wonders, poses challenges to civilized and constructive discussion, allowing vocal—and, often, anonymous—minorities to drag it down with invective (and worse). Starting today, then, we are asking people who'd like to post comments on the site to pay a nominal fee—less a paywall than a gesture of your own commitment to the cause of great conversation. All proceeds go to helping us bring you the ambitious journalism that brought you here in the first place.

I NEED TO BE HEARD! BUT I DONT WANT TO PAY.
Readers can still interact with us free of charge via Facebook, Twitter, and our other social media channels, or write to us at letters@tabletmag.com. Each week, we’ll select the best letters and publish them in a new letters to the editor feature on the Scroll.

We hope this new largely symbolic measure will help us create a more pleasant and cultivated environment for all of our readers, and, as always, we thank you deeply for your support.

Greenwald tweets: “We’re back in 2004 where people scan thousands of blog comments to find an offensive one and attribute it to the writer”.

I didn’t know it had stopped in 2004. I would be stunned by the immense amount of intellectual dishonesty in Lee Smith’s article if I hadn’t spent the last several decades reading similar stuff on-line.

Bill Wittelssays:

July 21, 2010 - 8:48 am

Wow. As the tweet that led me here put it, “Article about ‘anti-Semitic’ bloggers doesn’t contain a single anti-Semitic statement from any blogger.” I particularly like the way you included The Lede’s reporting of Israel-related stories. It helps clarify that what you’re calling “Jew-baiting” and “the intellectual equivalent of the topless ‘Page Three’ girls that British tabloids use to boost circulation” is reporting “Israel-related stories.” So the logic is that reporting about Israel may attract anti-Semitic comments, therefore reporting about Israel is Jew-baiting. It’s a sad day for Tablet.

Average American citizensays:

July 21, 2010 - 9:06 am

How pathetic. The IDF massacres 1400 Palestinians in Operation Cast Lead, using white phosphorus weaponry to incinerate children, and limb-shearing DIME cube bombs on elderly citizens, and your reflex is to accuse critics of anti-semitism or, here we go again, being self-hating Jews. That canard died a long time ago. The danger is that if all Jews reflexively support Zionism’s worst and most brutal excesses, such as Cast Lead, all the hasbara in the world will prevent Israel from being isolated in the community of nations.

It’s stunning that you name these prestigious and gifted writers and try to smear them with the tired and pathetic anti-Semitic trope. This is 2010, Lee Smith. You don’t realize how shrill your tone sounds in the age of the Internet.

Franklin D. Rosenfeldsays:

July 21, 2010 - 9:15 am

@ “Average American”

Do you actually believe anything of what you write? I guess not. IDF, massacres, cube bombs on “elderly citizens” (elderly Hamas bombmakers?) – you’re priceless, even for a troll.

The part about the “gifted” Jew-haters is also too good to be true.

lovelyisraelissays:

July 21, 2010 - 9:55 am

The Israeli supporters predictably come out to offer their enthusiastic support for a massacre in Gaza that has sickened the entire world. Such filth are themselves the leading source of anti-Semitism today.

Davidsays:

July 21, 2010 - 9:56 am

Another knee jerk reaction. You confuse hate with criticism of Israel and valid questions about US foreign policy. If you want some examples of hate, go to Israel and talk to any member of the Beteinu party. Go to Moshav Yishi and find settlers who want to live in an “arab-free” environment: http://moshavyishi.com/. Go meet the Kahanists. Go meet the Jack Teitel wannabes. Now THAT’S hate!

Then at least you’ll understand what some of Israel’s critics are really talking about.

fwsays:

July 21, 2010 - 10:03 am

The socialism of fools indeed. These moral perverts loitering around websites like Walt’s (or commenting above) reek of bitterness and personal failure. They revert to the primal human tendency of assigning blame, locating the source of their defeats in the oldest of scapegoats, the Jews. The criticisms they lodge are either founded on lies, or could be directed with equal or greater force at every other member of the world community. And yet other nations are exempt from this synthetic venom, fashioned from falsehood, inaccurate history, a fascism yellow-tinted with age, and the most durable of all racisms, Jew-hatred.

Andrew Sullivan is in his late-Elvis phase. He is just not the same person he was a decade ago.

Average American citizensays:

July 21, 2010 - 10:05 am

Hey, FDR, did you actually READ Walt-Mearshimer or did you simply dismiss them in a knee-jerk way as an Ivy-league-educated, david duke tagteam of anti-Semites? Did you ever read the Goldstone report — or was that, in your mind, yet another wildly anti-Semitic campaign.

Here’s my question to you, FDR — how can I as a human being express to you as a human being that the atrocities committed by the IDF in Operation Cast Lead using US taxpayer funded weapons were egregious, without you calling me a bigoted anti-Semitic troll.

lovelyisraelissays:

July 21, 2010 - 10:06 am

God forbid anyone expose Jeffrey Goldberg for the nauseating fraud and disgrace to the Jews he is. Meanwhile, Lee Smith cranks out this childish dreck day after day.

Or maybe he has moved to some hasbara software that writes it for him while he sleeps?

RGCsays:

July 21, 2010 - 10:17 am

Blog post about how mainstream opinion blogs become magnets for commenters spewing Israel-hate ironically becomes a blog post in which commenters spew Israel-hate. Very meta.

fwsays:

July 21, 2010 - 10:18 am

Even granting hypothetical legitimacy to these hysterical claims about Israel for the sake of argument, it would in no way call for the grotesque language they are couched in, which attests to the unbalanced nature of the commenters they originate with.

And it is utter moral failure on the part of the sponsors of these other dreck-ridden sites that they haven’t policed the comments section.

Ahavasays:

July 21, 2010 - 10:21 am

thank you for the article. it is indeed upsetting to see how the internet can spread false information and hate.

Frayed Knotsays:

July 21, 2010 - 10:25 am

And I thought 2004 was when we were looking for Glen Greenwald’s sock puppets. I guess nowadays, he has mindless dittohead minions to do his dirty work and infect the comments threads of posts he doesn’t like. Indeed they prove Lee Smith’s point.

It is, however, too bad that you couldn’t find someone in addition to Jeffrey Goldberg to quote. Perhaps someone no associated with Tablet?

BTW, kudos on calling out Andrew Sullivan on what he’s become.

gillsays:

July 21, 2010 - 10:31 am

Average American
Operation Cast Lead was a retaliation.
Of those killed – most were combatants. Terrorists don’t wear uniforms.
Ask why they had women and children in building from which they fired rockets?
Answer
COWARDS AND PIGS

nypsays:

July 21, 2010 - 10:34 am

” …. their careers as Jew-baiters”

What a stupid article.

elisays:

July 21, 2010 - 10:47 am

Denying Israel’s right to exist, demonizing Israel and/or using a double standard to judge Israel are hall marks of anti-Semitism which hides as “anti-Israeli”.

There is lots of room to disagree with Israeli policies – but that is very different from the anti-Semitism of bloggers like Weiss, Greenwald etc. and the comments on their blogs.

DavidSsays:

July 21, 2010 - 10:50 am

Point Proved. QED. Amazing how this article brought out all the
“Raped Cossack” style comments from hateful types who take the Goldstone Report as their Bible, Steve Walt as their prophet, the Turkish terror flotilla as their Exodus and of course Israel as their Satan.

timicomsays:

July 21, 2010 - 10:50 am

This is one of the worst articles I’ve read in a long time. The first para is a real keeper. Perhaps the “surge of public criticism of Israel” has nothing to do with 9/11 or the internet – but is related to.. Israel.

Your attempts to smear Sullivan and Walt are pathetic. I don’t mind reading contrary opinions – but there needs to some effort at evidence and fact-finding…

fwsays:

July 21, 2010 - 10:51 am

It is also extraordinarily telling that this endless gutter of hatred and filth has been a matter of indifference to the mainstream writers who host it. You would have expected that just once, at least, each might have issued a statement condemning it.

Some do, of course, which exemplifies the difference between men and women of integrity and those who will pander to the worst elements in our society if it will increase their traffic.

Willow Arunesays:

July 21, 2010 - 10:58 am

Hmmmm. When will this writer understand that being critical of the Isaeli gvernment is no more anti-Semetic than being critical of American foreign policy is anti-American. Did we not learn this all too well in the build up to the Iraqi War?
The Israel lobby has been far more conservative (or neo-conservative) than the Jewish American population and not reflctive of American values. The United States needs to reclaim the role of honest broker.

Average American citizensays:

July 21, 2010 - 10:59 am

Gill, very cute picture of the cat, but your position is untenable.

It’s well-known that Operation Cast Lead was intended to deploy the Dahiya Doctrine, in which even cilivians are considered combatants. That doctrine includes the massive and wanton destruction of infrastructure (schools, factories, water treatment plants, etc). From ynet.com, the invention of the term:http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3605863,00.html

I know mentioning Goldstone may make me vulnerable to accusations of being anti-Semitic (although my wife and kids are Jewish, and I too have a cute cat), but it was clear the IDF deployed the Dahiya Doctrine in Gaza to maximize civilian casualties, destroy infrastructure and intensify the siege with the slim hope that the aftermath of OCL would turn the civilian population against Hamas. Goldstone’s conclusion: “disproportionate destruction against citizens were part of a deliberate policy”.

If true, how can you call that “retaliation?”. Sounds more like “pretext.”

me besays:

July 21, 2010 - 11:00 am

theres a good article on mondoweiss today about how an Israeli report on shootings of ‘4 civilians’ fails to state that they were three sisters, 3, 5, and 9, and their grandmother

I see a bunch of people with power abusing the powerless. doesnt matter what religions are involved, thats what is happening.

asherZsays:

July 21, 2010 - 11:05 am

The comments above that characterize Operation Cast Lead as a “massacre’ or an “atrocity” are written by Kool-Aid drinkers who believe some of the material written by Palestinian stringers in the media or just read other blogs and take what is written as fact. But then facts don’t really matter (see the Gaza Flotilla reporting and reactions, with videos that totally disprove the negative commentary there for all to see). It is reminiscent of the so-called Jenin massacre which had similar erroneous reporting. The fact is that Hamas locates its fighters in the midst of civilian areas, and had lobbed over 7000 missiles into Israeli towns which is the reason this operation was launched. Israel has always tried its best to avoid civilian casualties and collateral damage. The IDF is probably more focused on this than ANY other army in the world. And anyone who says they don’t hate Jews but just the Jewish state doesn’t comprehend that the land of Israel is an integral part of the religion. But none of this matters to the viscerally bile-filled individual who for whatever reason hates the Jew. We will continue to make contributions to all of humanity in so many ways and far beyond our small numbers, even to those who would rather see us dead. It’s been this way for 3000 years.

fwsays:

July 21, 2010 - 11:18 am

Shrill denunciations of circumcision, Sullivan’s longtime bugaboo, and accusing parents who have male children circumcised as perpetrators of ‘mutilation of boys’ is not criticism of Israel. Sullivan knows very well whom he was attacking by painting them as barbaric. It was an olde-tyme invocation of the blood libel.

And it is a dark irony the way Sullivan assails the Israel Lobby as indiscriminately throwing around the term ‘antisemite’, when he pulls out the ‘homophobe’ label like a gunslinger whenever someone challenges his opinions about matters bearing on the gay community.

And when you employ schoolyard pidgin English to mock a spokesperson for AIPAC, as in “he so clever”, even falling back onto the stereotype of the ‘clever Jew’, you are doing something besides leveling legitimate criticism of Israel.

Paul Freedmansays:

July 21, 2010 - 11:22 am

That anti-Semitic demonization of Israel and American Jewish supporters is a central pillar of the neo-isolationist condemnation of the “Israel lobby” or the “Jewish lobby” is self-evident given–well, self evident to anyone besides the Jewish-bashing paranoids themselves. That Israel commands overwhelming support from American Christians cannot ever, given the circular logic of anti-Semites, be an indication that supporting Israel is, well, “American”–no, it must always be interpreted as proving that the Jewish lobby just is a mind-controlling den of iniquity with numerous tentacles–even as Buchanan and Sullivan and Cole and the rest of the bug-eyed crew support such “American” red-white-and-blue down home good ol’ boys as Hezbollah, Hamas, the Muslim Brotherhood and on and on and on and their supporters….

anniesays:

July 21, 2010 - 11:46 am

“the fringe population of semi-literate paranoids and shut-ins who seek admission to mainstream American intellectual life”

only in your dreams lee smith. awareness of israel’s transgressions is no longer limited to a ‘fringe population’. israel is now center stage and there’s no one to blame but israel, if you don’t like it change israel. conflating exposing crime w/’jew baiting’ is as tired and worn out as a 60 year old whore. the reason these blogs are so popular is because the mainstream media white washes israel. last week on the day the video was leaked of netanyahu bragging about deceiving the US to destroy olso the nyt ignored it and published a story about women being banned from smoking hookas in gaza. wake up, the train has left the station.

i’ve read some great reporting at tablet, this doesn’t qualify.

Bronsteinsays:

July 21, 2010 - 11:47 am

Nice to see that this week Smith is getting creamed for his refusal to cite evidence and his confusion between Zionism and Judaism. His last disgusting article brought out the most virulent and basically stupid anti-Muslim (and anti-intellectual) reactions. By his logic, this makes him a vicious anti-Islamic polemicist.

Wait, he is.

anniesays:

July 21, 2010 - 11:49 am

“That Israel commands overwhelming support from American Christians cannot ever, given the circular logic of anti-Semites, be an indication that supporting Israel is, well, “American” ”

sure paul freedman, it’s about as american as the rapture.

europamedicalsays:

July 21, 2010 - 11:51 am

Could we please have a break from Lee Smith’s paranoid and tiresome ramblings for a while? What a relief to turn to Ha’aretz where, despite differing views, it’s possible to see cogent arguments and evidence of ‘intelligence’.

Martin Graysays:

July 21, 2010 - 11:55 am

Let’s see what America thinks on November 10, 2011.

The J Street “54” are all running for cover.

Support for the State of Israel among Americans of all kinds is at an all time high.

Those kind of numbers scupper the crap put out by Jew Baiters and Jew Haters in whatever format these minor league Goebbels and their Muslim friends are allowed to publish.

I can’t imagine how much this must piss them off!

Marksays:

July 21, 2010 - 12:20 pm

Why is it hateful for fellow Jews to criticize Israeli policy and actions? So we have devolved into calling fellow Jews names instead of arguing their points?

I see no problem pointing out the open letters, the op-eds and articles written by neoconservatives and Israeli leaders such as Bibi, Barak and Peres who opined and called for the Iraq war. It’s in print and they lobbied for it. It’s also fact that the majority of us in the Jewish community were against the war. So why aren’t we going after the neocons who don’t represent the majority of our views? Why are we going after the people who simply point this out?

We now trust Bill Kristol who signed the letters and wrote the articles pushing for the war over people who got it right and saw that it would be a huge disaster for both the U.S. and Israel?

Unbelievable.

Josephsays:

July 21, 2010 - 12:27 pm

The worst of the worst is Andrew Cockburn’s virulently anti-Israel site, Counterpunch.com.

On the other side, the right-wing site pajamasmedia.com is so virulently anti-Islamic that it could (and might) serve as a recruiting tool for al Qaeda.

Lee Smith, you go girl! Rolling out the “Jew-baiting” tripe and gettin’ some traffic. Tablet is an excellent magazine, I don’t understand why they would have Lee Smith’s goyim-baiting hatred on its site. It doesn’t help tone down the rhetoric on either side. Hey, Israel! Free Gaza now!

HaSoferetsays:

July 21, 2010 - 12:40 pm

I confess I didn’t really agree with all of what Lee Smith said in the article, and I think his research methods and the conclusions drawn therefrom had some problems, but unfortunately most of the comments serve to prove his points.

motfehsays:

July 21, 2010 - 12:48 pm

Well I was about to expose the ridiculousness of your article, but other readers took care of that. I am glad to see that very few people are still buying your “Anti-semitism” accusations. (intentionally) confusing criticism of some Israeli policies and Anti-Semitism, although a core argument for the past 40 years or so, can no longer be your line of defense.

samsays:

July 21, 2010 - 12:55 pm

Good article. Everything is context. The anti-Israel invective can only be anti-semitic because it is so disproportional compared to any outcry over anywhere else on earth. North Korea sunk a ship killing almost 50 sailors without any provocation the same week as the killing aboard the Turkish ship. Gazans have a higher standard of living than almost anyone in the Arab world. What about the Kurds, Tibetans, etc., etc., etc.?

Sam, unfortunately, your analogy is flawed. If Israel committed war crimes with US taxpayer funds and killed 1400 Palestinians, including hundreds of children, and hundreds of women and elderly, while sustaining 13 casulaties on its side, you can’t simply whitewash that away by pointing to the North Korea incident. Israel’s misconduct doesn’t fade away simply because atrocities are happening in Darfur, for example.

I think Lee Smith’s article is an expression of frustration that suppression of IDF atrocities were easier when the corporate owned MSM had a monopoly.

Gazans do not have a high standard of living. That’s a dangerous, intellectually-dishonest canard that Frank Luntz warns is the worst kind of hasbara. It hurts your cause.

Jerry Sametsays:

July 21, 2010 - 1:19 pm

Israel may be politically in the wrong about all sorts of things, but virtually all states are arguably AS wrong and wronger in some of THEIR political stances and actions.

So the question is, why does Israel’s purported wrongdoing draw the excessive fire it does? Why do otherwise intelligent people take time to tell the web how ‘sickened’ they are by Israeli actions etc and ignore much more ‘sickening’ events around the globe? Why do they write as if the community of nations is a happy family of cooperating and open-minded regimes, and Israel is a pariah and evil outsider? Any survey of the grief in the world caused by regime after regime makes it plain that this is not an accurate picture of global affairs.

That’s the problem Smith is pointing to.

The only explanation is that there is a heightened emotion operating here, and whether it’s called anti-Semitism, or anti-Zionism, or whatever–it’s plain that it is directed at Jews as a nation or community.

There is a long long history of this emotion in the West, and we know the symptoms of its grip on people (some keywords–taken from the comments above: filth, cabal, ‘suicide [them]’, Jewish-control, genocide, treating every death inflicted by Jews as a ‘massacre’, etc.). One would think that people of good will who are critical of Israel would recognize that there is an undercurrent of dangerous hate that wants to use such criticism for abominable ends. The fact that Smith’s targets are nonchalant about all these dangers is telling.

A thought experiment: Imagine a websites exclusively devoted to reporting crimes by African-Americans in great detail. Even if the reports were scrupulously accurate, one would have to wonder about the intent and consequences.

Yonisays:

July 21, 2010 - 1:36 pm

This article makes another pernicious conflation of antizionism or criticism of Israel with antisemtisim But a note to those of you here for the first time: Tablet is a website with incredible cultural and historical material and absolutely awful politics.

Ian Wilsonsays:

July 21, 2010 - 1:37 pm

WOW! 37 responses and counting. The great Maimonidies would buckle at such responsa. On a serious note the rise in anti-Semitism vis-a-vis Israel is indeed shocking. I am not jewish and so far i have never set foot in Israel, yet the overwhelming documentation/investigation in the Lexicon of anti-semitism is surprising to this outsider. You-tube commentators are the worst. While the videos posted are intersting to the viewer, the typed abuse is vulgar. Where are the watchdogs? The term ‘Nazi’ is used to describe the IDF frequently, the Shoah is mocked and its victims victimized. Such abuse is common place and perhaps a new organization is required. May i suggest the IADL (Internet Anti Defamation League).

HaSoferetsays:

July 21, 2010 - 1:38 pm

Jerry Samet…..well said.

ishmael darosays:

July 21, 2010 - 1:48 pm

Lee Smith:

I’m a reader of several of the blogs you wrote about. I am also generally critical of Israeli policies toward Palestinians. I realize that in parts of the blogosphere that are critical of Israel, anti-Semitism does rear its ugly head from time to time.

Therefore, I read your piece with great interest, in the hopes that you might expose one of the authors as having written something truly outrageous that goes beyond mere political differences. In that aim, you have failed. Merely citing hateful comments left on blogs (among hundreds of other comments that are not anti-Semitic) proves that the authors, no matter what sort of readers they occasionally attract, are not saying anything bigoted.

You could have engaged specific critiques these writers have with Israeli policy and U.S. policy toward Israel, challenged them for being misguided or wrong, and actually added to the conversation about Middle-Eastern politics. Instead, you have smeared four writers as “Jew-baiters” with almost nothing but conjecture.

Seemingly the best you could come up with as a criticism was that the subject of Israel garners a lot of attention and debate, leading to many reader comments. You then translate this into:

“These numbers suggest that the purpose of Walt’s blog is to act as a magnet for the animus of a readership hostile not only to Israel but also to American figures friendly to Israel, especially American Jews.”

That is quite a leap, but if you wanted simply to continue the practice of smearing any critics of Israel as anti-Semitic without actually proving said anti-Semitism, you should be happy.

Jerry, your response is thoughtful and in some ways compelling. But zionism is not judiasm. There are some who claim that Zionism is hiding its worst excesses behind world Jewry, and indeed, there are vast numbers of Jews who are saying that Operation Cast Lead and the flotilla attack are not to be carried out in their names as Jews.

There’s a fundamental issue that Lee Smith unfortunately didn’t discuss. The vitriol on the web is directed at a nation’s wrongdoings, not a people. Those who defend the nation’s misconduct by stating that any criticism is latent anti-Semitism do so at the peril of trying to defend the indefensible. That said, the criticism of a nation should not be permitted to cross the line into anti-Semitism. That would have been a much more interesting article for Smith to have written, than smearing Walt, Weiss, Sullivan and Greenwald and using some bloggere comments.

HaSoferetsays:

July 21, 2010 - 1:58 pm

Is it possible for us to at least agree that Zionism and the policies of the past or present governments of the State of Israel are not one and the same?

Ian Wilsonsays:

July 21, 2010 - 2:02 pm

Click below if you believe the rise in anti-Semitism is inflated hype. This news story is up to date and beyond belief.

Ian Wilson, agree completely, this is reprehensible beyond words, disgusting and must be ended. But with all due respect, it has nothing to do at all with the Lee Smith article, does it?

Ian Wilsonsays:

July 21, 2010 - 2:41 pm

Conscientious Objector: A reply.

You are quite correct, however Irael is often attacked for using the memory of Shoah victims for its own purposes, such as Palestine. If the Israeli government were to respond to this Daily Mail story such attacks would begin again. Anti-semitism has no borders, such incursions require checkpoints, checkpoints need to be manned, the military is the best choice, and if any incidents occur the term ‘nazi’ rears its ugly head, the internet awakes; the desire to feed overwhelmes and the monsters gorge. The internet highway led to this, the internet highway led me here, the internet highway led you to the Daily Mail. No wonder Mearshimer and Co succeed in their venture.

Anthonysays:

July 21, 2010 - 3:36 pm

Phillip Weiss, Stephen Walt, Glenn Greenwald, Andrew Sullivan are amongst the greatest living jews living today. And this article full of smears, from people who answer truth with smears shows how effective they are in combating hate and racism. Keep on tucking Lee Smith!

Speedysays:

July 21, 2010 - 3:42 pm

So Let’s see.

If Israel defends itself against thousands of rockets over a 7 year period by invading Gaza they are brutal.

If Gazans elect the Hamas party with a 70% majority whose doctrine proudly includes a clearly genocidal agenda, they are victims.

If people criticize Israel for it’s actions in defense of it’s citizens, they are not anti-semitic.

Puzzling and disturbing – but I think I understand.

Conscientious Objectorsays:

July 21, 2010 - 3:51 pm

Ian, I abhor that this subculture exists, and I am vehemently against the defamation of the Shoah.

That said, Walt-Mearshimer wrote a policitcal book, NOT an anti-Semitic screed. (Sorry, Lee Smith.) They inquired about a political process — the influence of AIPAC on the American Congress. Their work was meticulously researched and it was a legitimate inquiry. Overall, it is dangerous to link a subculture of venomous anti-Semites who collect Nazi memorabilia with the work of two highly regarded professors. After all, such a linkage diminishes the gravity of referring to someone or something anti-Semitic. I hope you can agree on some level.

“…..Blog post about how mainstream opinion blogs become magnets for commenters spewing Israel-hate ironically becomes a blog post in which commenters spew Israel-hate. Very meta….”

and even more so 20 comments later …..

Lanesays:

July 21, 2010 - 4:01 pm

This is so cheap. Never heard of the Tablet before. Never coming back.

I made it as far as the paragraph where you accuse Foreign Policy of hiring Steven Walt to bring anti-Semitic traffic, because “traffic is traffic”. That’s an awfully broad anti-Semitic brush you have there. I stopped reading at that point.

You should be ashamed.

michmwsays:

July 21, 2010 - 4:02 pm

It makes me sad that this sort of slander is passed off as support for Jews and for Israel.

Shame on you.

Gary Williamssays:

July 21, 2010 - 4:03 pm

And THAT folks….is a perfect example of how the Israeli right-wing conservative differs very little from those in any other nation or religious sensibility. All the characteristics that mark the RWA (right-wing authoritarian – Altemeyer) thinking are present here in this screed/rant/whine. Their need for certainty, lack of empathy and reduced ability to think in complexities reveals itself here by the way Smith conflates Zionism with Judaism, Islam with terrorism, criticism of Israel with opposition to it’s very existence and outright anti-Semitism. A hallmark behavior of this group is an inability to see the world in any other way than a black & white, Us vs Them, Good vs Evil, “You’re either with us, or against us” manner.

The latter statement is of course the words of another RWA personality whose election to POTUS resulted in the disastrous policies the world is still attempting to recover from. And those policies include putting PNAC in charge of his Iraq policy…an action that in itself invalidates almost all of Smith’s assertions about Walt, Greenwald and others.

If Smith was capable of realizing the complexities of creating an unwanted, unasked-for Jewish state sin the middle of overwhelmingly Arab Palestine, he would also be able to see how the true enemy of Israel is the ability of some to invoke in others mindless tribalism and sweeping generalizations of others based on the actions of small minorities. For it’s this that made it possible for Hitler to carry out the Holocaust, for Osama to carry out 911, and for Iranian and Israeli right-wing conservatives like Khomeini and Netanyahu to find followers simply by amplifying fears while invoking tribal loyalties.

Throughout history, gruesome slaughters are both preceded by and justified later by someone using the same “victim” template Smith is trying to invoke here. Don’t fall for it.

Michael B. Morrissays:

July 21, 2010 - 4:09 pm

It’s odd that you don’t present examples of the anti-Semitic screeds that any of the mentioned bloggers have supposedly written.

I read Greenwald and Sullivan’s posts regularly and I can’t recall a time when I thought either was spewing hatred. Their posts are factual and well reasoned.

If you are able to demonstrate otherwise I think you should. Otherwise, you have no credibility.

asherZsays:

July 21, 2010 - 4:11 pm

Those who say that anti-Semitism is not the same as ant-Zionism just don’t know what Judaism is about. Israel is the national liberation movement of the Jewish people. Close to 300 of the 613 commandments of the Torah are rooted in the land. The Diaspora is an abnormal locus for Jews which had been their punishment for almost 2000 years.
Someone who opposes the existance of a Jewish State is an anti-Semite ipso facto.

Ilya Lozovskysays:

July 21, 2010 - 4:12 pm

What a bunch of disgusting slander. Shame on the Tablet for printing this garbage.

Just to pull out one example: Lee calls Andrew Sullivan a Jew-baiter without offering a single, solitary shred of evidence. Can he link to an article Andrew wrote that would demonstrate this? A blog post? A single quote?

This is such garbage. Are you guys so insecure that your only response to legitimate policy differences is to scream anti-semitism?

rlgordonmasays:

July 21, 2010 - 4:17 pm

I love Tablet, but I have to say that this article creeped me out.

First of all, while Sullivan has been obsessive about Israel’s faults as of late, he should not be smeared with any anti-Semitic brush. Thoughtful people should observe the line he keeps; he expects more of Israel as an American because, as Americans, we give a damn lot to her. [NB I do not agree with Sullivan too much, I am more of a mind to agree with Jeffrey Goldberg.] Further, Sullivan doesn’t even publish comments.

Second, why hasn’t Smith even bothered to TALK with the bloggers about whom he is purportedly reporting? As Jeffrey Goldberg advises Glenn Greenwald, perhaps it would be nice to pick up the phone every so often.

In any case, I don’t disagree with Smith’s point that the blog sites run by some big media outlets publish things about Jews that would have been unthinkable 10 years ago. This is a serious problem. It is up to us to figure out how we are to deal with it. On the other hand, Smith got a lot of facts wrong and wrote what looks like a shoddy piece. Such wretched work hinders solutions to the problems he is trying to communicate.

I too am troubled by how any criticism against Israel’s foreign and internal policies is some how interpreted as anti-Semitic? Israel does have a very large lobby in America, organized or not. Is it evil to admit this is so? And, is it automatically racist to admit it? I think we go too far sometimes. Is Jewish America really that insecure?

anniesays:

July 21, 2010 - 4:22 pm

jerry samet, you begin your strawman by asserting

” virtually all states are arguably AS wrong and wronger in some of THEIR political stances and actions.”

this is blatantly untrue. ‘virtually all states’ (especially ‘western democracies’) do not have 40 year occupations where 50% of the people the occupying government rules over have no vote (representation) in their elected officials. nor do they violate the geneva accords (article 40 fourth geneva conventions: “The Occupying Power shall not deport or transfer parts of its own civilian population into the territory it occupies.”) by building illegal settlements many of them on land owned privately by palestinian individuals. and i challenge you to demonstrate just one western democracy engaging in such behavior.

oh, maybe because we’re funding it’s apartheid state with our tax dollars. or maybe because we are protecting israel from joining the international community that actually respects and obeys international law by repeatedly using our veto to thwart international law from playing it’s role.

you follow up your false narrative w/a false conclusion basically engaging in an ad hominem attack against human rights activists by stating “The only explanation is that there is a heightened emotion operating here, and whether it’s called anti-Semitism, or anti-Zionism, or whatever–it’s plain that it is directed at Jews as a nation or community.”

you’re engaging in willful denial. you may as well put your hands over your ears and scream ‘la la la la la’ to better evade what people are communicating. you think by making us deformed we will see your demented light of day. that will not happen and many jews of conscious are leading this movement both in america and the world. if israel, as a homeland for the jews, seeks to represent them it’s doing an ugly job of it any they have a right to speak out.

L. Kingsays:

July 21, 2010 - 4:36 pm

I used to say that Mearsheimer and Walt were not anti-semites themselves, but merely provided a set of tools. I found their book poorly researched and easy to take apart, as did many others, provided one knew the actual history of both sides of the conflict. (I have a review of the book on Amazon’s web site dated Sept 7, 2008.)

The big flaw in the “Israel Lobby” text is that where it begins with discussing AIPAC it then switches to talk about a completely different group of people regarding Iraq. AIPAC had no position at all on Iraq and did not lobby on the issue. The Israeli government was asked for advice and gave it however it had advised against invasion arguing that Iraq was contained. Then there is the invasion Afghanistan which preceded Iraq and doesn’t fit the model. There is a pro-Israel Lobby – it had nothing to do with influencing Bush, Cheney et al to invade Iraq. That was the decision of the Aministration taken for reasons that were driven by other interests than Israel.

What changed my mind on Mearsheimer was his recent “New Afrikaners” speech which was purely incendiary application of guilt by implied association. The tone was that of the “polite” drawing room antisemite, pontificating on who were the good Jews and who were the bad Jews – and I found that to be unacceptable.

Adamsays:

July 21, 2010 - 4:42 pm

As a Jewish regular reader of most of the writers slandered in this piece, I can’t say that I’ve ever found any hint of anti-Semitism in their work. You do Jews a massive disservice when you cheapen the definition of anti-Semitism to include any criticism of the actions of the Israeli government. You accuse mainstream media outlets of making anti-Semitism respectable, but actually it’s you who, by turning the topic into a political football, are undermining the seriousness of the charge.

Conscientious Objectorsays:

July 21, 2010 - 4:45 pm

AsherZ says: “Someone who opposes the existance of a Jewish State (based on the Old Testament) is an anti-Semite ipso facto.”

Um, gee, AsherZ . . . then you may have a problem here. If every Gentile who doesn’t go along with your narrow, apocalyptic reading of the OT — and the genocidal violence that must occur to ethnically cleanse Palestine of its indigenous population — is an anti-Semite, you’ve just accused, just a guesstimate, 90% of the world population of being anti-Semites. Sorry, but your deeply held religious beliefs do not entitle you to justify a slow motion genocide of the Palestinians, the siege in Gaza or Operation Cast Lead.

Lee Smith, do you now see the absurdity of your premise? You’re not helping, you’re hurting the cause of Zionists.

JWeisssays:

July 21, 2010 - 4:48 pm

So let me get this straight Lee — you are accusing a set of well respected writers as antisemites, and as proof, you’re offering up…their commenters? Have you ever read the comment threads on politico? Or Huffingtonpost? Or even, you know, ABCNews.com? I’m not even talking about the comments on articles about Israel. If you haven’t, please let me introduce you to a place we affectionately call the interweb. It can get pretty ugly.

Also, quoting a contribuitng editor at your own publication? That’s just shoddy work — like first year journalism student shoddy.

Dansays:

July 21, 2010 - 4:49 pm

“TThose who say that anti-Semitism is not the same as ant-Zionism just don’t know what Judaism is about. Israel is the national liberation movement of the Jewish people. Close to 300 of the 613 commandments of the Torah are rooted in the land. The Diaspora is an abnormal locus for Jews which had been their punishment for almost 2000 years.
Someone who opposes the existance of a Jewish State is an anti-Semite ipso facto.”

I’m a two-stater, so I’m not sure what that makes me. (My guess, because I don’t support an Israeli theocracy, is condemnation.) But the above isn’t Judaism, it’s fundamentalism.

If you were right (which you’re not), there’s no reason a non-Jew would care about being an ‘anti-Semite’. They’ve got no allegiance to those commands.

It’s really a bizarre position.

abrxassays:

July 21, 2010 - 4:57 pm

The only bright lining to this dark cloud an article is the comments taking the lazy author to task.

The use of the internet ( or any medium, for that matter) to spread Anti-Semitism is repugnant but perhaps not surprising. Peddlers of hate have often found ways to make use of the latest technology to spread racism and encourage ethnic strife, the difference with the internet, say, as opposed to the printing press is that the internet allows these people to do so much more quickly and inexpensively than at any previous point in history. It is for this reason that those of us who are not taken in by such malicious lies must be vigilant in setting the record straight and stand up to those who seek to foment ethnic, religious and racial hatred and violence. The idea that Foreign Policy, an otherwise respectable publication, might be making use of underlying Anti-Semitic sentiments to boost readership is particularly disturbing, given the influence that this publication has in foreign policy circles. Another thing that strikes me is that once again we are seeing old stereotypes and lies re-emerging in slightly different forms – the idea that Jews are somehow in control of or manipulating the government or banking system has been with us for a very long time. Kudos to Lee Smith for writing about this upsetting and important topic.

Lisasays:

July 21, 2010 - 5:15 pm

This article is ridiculous and totally deligitimizes Tablet as any type of credible news source. It is transparent right wing propoganda to attack the critics rather than address the policies they are addressing. People who have no tolerance for legitimate concerns over Israeli policy, have no business living in a democracy. We are too far passed getting away with just labeling anyone who publishes criticism as anti-Israel. You are out of touch with your readers and the future generations of American Jews.

So if Sullivan and Greenwald are anti-semites, and the Washington Post and The Nation are wallowing in anti-semitism, what is one to make of the hateful, bigoted invective that fills the talkback sections of The Jerusalem Post, the JTA, and even Ha’aretz?

Conscientious Objectorsays:

July 21, 2010 - 5:18 pm

L. King says: “AIPAC had no position at all on Iraq and did not lobby on the issue. The Israeli government was asked for advice and gave it however it had advised against invasion arguing that Iraq was contained. . . There is a pro-Israel Lobby – it had nothing to do with influencing Bush, Cheney et al to invade Iraq. That was the decision of the Aministration taken for reasons that were driven by other interests than Israel.”

L.King, you are joking, right? You’re either intellectually dishonest or intentionally underinformed. You are denying the existence of the Project for a New American Century? The Office of Special Plans? Have you read “A Pretext for War” by James Bamford? If not, please do so before smearing Walt & Mearshimer.

michasays:

July 21, 2010 - 5:21 pm

Good article. It is amazing the degree to which mainstream publications have begun to tolerate anti Jewish rhetoric in both columnists and commentators that masquerades as anti-Israel. It is a mystery to me how 60 years after the shoah, and after a millenium in which the Jewish people were scapegoated and made into pariahs again and again, people have so little self consciousness as to promulgate or tolerate this patter happening all over again with Israel. Israel has gotten more reprimand for killing 9 people in self defence on the flotilla than the French have recieved for supporting Rwandan genociders who killed one million people for no reason other than hatred. Not everything Israel does is right, states make many mistakes, but the Israeli people has proved themselves over and over again to be willing to make great sacrifices for peace–and have been hit in return by murderous suicide bombers–the equivalent, in the two years after the Oslo agreement collapsed because Arafat was unwilling to accept peace, Israel was hit by what in the United States would have been the equivalent of five thousand suicide bombs (per capita). How would the US have reacted to this? People talk about the Israel lobby. Why do people not talk of the extreme power of the Arab and Persian oil states, whose wealth and influence dwarf Israel,and who fund people like Walt? Yasher Koach to Lee for a great piece. Tbanks!

Dani Levisays:

July 21, 2010 - 5:22 pm

Robert Mackey’s The Lede at the NYT, seemed strange to me. My comments have repeatedly been removed by Mackey, and sadly, his threads include clear pro Arab and anti-Israel comments. He approaches a very complex subject and nearly always fails to see the brutality/”human rights situation” in Arab countries. That this man is mentioned here assures me that I am not alone. Although I can not say much about the other writers mentioned here. I do most certainly read a great deal of anti-semitic bile all over the net. A ‘great’ UK publication is The Guardian, where the threads just fall over themselves in clear hate of Israel and US Hebrews.
This is not surprising, since the UK left and the UK Muslims just love a good bashing encouraged by oratorial thugs such as George Galloway. Yes the web has brought together haters of the world, there is no doubt about that.

Evan Harpersays:

July 21, 2010 - 5:31 pm

Hey, Lee Smith; watch this!

The Irish are a bunch of lazy drunkards and they’re taking over the country and they’re a bunch of Fenian papists who take orders from the Antichrist in Rome.

Look, Lee Smtih! Now you’re ipso facto an anti-Irish and anti-Catholic bigot! Because of something some guy you don’t know and have no control over and don’t agree with said in your comments section.

Makes perfect sense.

Dannysays:

July 21, 2010 - 5:45 pm

I think I agree with the vast majority of readers here when I say that you have no idea what you’re talking about. I’m a Jew, born and raised Modern Orthodox, fluent in Hebrew with relatives in Israel (some of whom have served in the military there, others who made aliyah later in life). I read Sullivan and Greenwald regularly and I haven’t detected a shred of anti-semitism in their approach to the often-troubling policies of the current government. The policy disagreements that Sullivan and Greenwald have with Israel; their respective evaluations of the human rights situation in Israel, the West Bank, and Gaza; and their political judgments about Israel’s value to US interests are all reasoned and often, in my estimation, correct…

Gary Williamssays:

July 21, 2010 - 5:53 pm

A simple question to those who defend Cast Lead: When citing Hamas-Pali rockets as the reason for the operation, why is it that none of you ever mention the number of Israeli citizens killed by the attacks; always opting instead to cite the number of rockets launched per year, launches in total, or the increased area of coverage that each successive Qasam model is capable of reaching, the number of potential Israeli casualties each model threatens…..but never, ever, using the most important number of all — the actual number of people killed ! Why is it that?

Conscientious Objectorsays:

July 21, 2010 - 5:56 pm

Evan Harper says: “Hey, Lee Smith; watch this! Now you’re ipso facto an anti-Irish and anti-Catholic bigot! Because of something some guy you don’t know and have no control over and don’t agree with said in your comments section.”

Evan Harper — way to nail Lee Smith for intellectually-lazy, dishonest and inflammatory reporting! This was a non-story from the beginning, and the usually stellar standards of Tablet should have prevented this sewage from becoming an internet meme. Glenn Greenwald also nailed this on his 20,000-follower Twitter feed when he said that Smith’s article was about accusations of anti-Semitism without a single example of anti-Semitism. Very dangerous accusations and Alana Newhouse should take steps to rein him in.

Those who “support” Israel by supporting the racist, colonial policies of Netanyahu are no true friend of Israel; rather, they encourage more decades of conflict and isolation. All who want a democratic Jewish state should work toward one goal: end the occupation. Does believing this make me a self-hating Jew, Mr. Smith?

Henrysays:

July 21, 2010 - 6:25 pm

If the article was written with the words “anti-Israel” in place of antisemitism, the author would have a point. Many of these authors — including Sullivan — seem to hold Israel to impossible standards and are very quick to find fault with the country. But labeling anything anti-Israel as antisemetic does great injustice to real antisemitism.

You can even believe Israel has no right to exist and not be antisemitic. Just like you can believe Tibet shouldn’t be free and not be anti-Tibetan.

Mikesays:

July 21, 2010 - 6:28 pm

Wow! this is shocking. You must live in a bubble.

A proud racist is the foreign minister of Israel. You don’t have a problem with that.

You cannot find a single racist quote from the people you slander as anti semitic. All you can do is quote from the comments section.

I used to be very pro Israel. I still am. I have simply changed the definition of what it means to be pro Israel. It does not mean approving everything the Israeli govt does. It does not mean cheering on as the Israeli govt steals the land of Palestinians. It does not mean agreeing with every AIPAC newsletter.

You are doing a great disservice to the ideals Israel was founded upon and Judaism in general. What you are advocating is tribalism. Your motto is “my tribe right or wrong”. If Israel built concentration camps you would cheer on. If Israel turned into an Apartheid state, already happening, you would make excuses.

Thanks to the Internet your influence is waning. We don’t have to rely on WSJ and WP editorial pages to get our information. There are honest voices out there. And you don’t like it one bit.

Jasonsays:

July 21, 2010 - 6:35 pm

South Africa didn’t like it when people complained about their apartheid either. go figure.

A Freedmansays:

July 21, 2010 - 6:41 pm

Annie’s screed asserts that “‘virtually all states’ (especially ‘western democracies’) do not have 40 year occupations . . . nor do they violate the geneva accords . . . and i challenge you to demonstrate just one western democracy engaging in such behavior.”

There are so many false assumptions in this statement, it’s difficult to know where to begin. Given limitations of time and space, I’ll stick to Annie’s implicit assertion that “[no] western democracy engage[ed]in such behavior.” She’s right – but not in the way she thinks. Israel is being asked – and all recent Israeli governments have agreed – to do what no country in history has been asked to do: give over territory to which it has long historical roots, which it obtained in a purely defensive war and which was not previously a legitimate part of any country. All Israel asked in return is (i) recognition of its legitimacy, (ii) recognition of its right to live in peace, (iii) recognition of its character as a Jewish state and (iv) minor border adjustments (for which it would fully compensate the Palestinians in the form of additional territory).

Jacobsays:

July 21, 2010 - 6:44 pm

Oh for the love, this again? Irving Kristol was writing this exact column half a century ago, and much more stylishly.

RJsays:

July 21, 2010 - 6:48 pm

I think a most of these comments miss the point. I take the Mr. Smith to be saying that FP.com, etc. are targeting, as a matter of strategy, a particular audience: namely, people who have a problem with Jewish political power. That audience is well represented in this comment section today. If that audience were to show up, faithfully, week after week on this site, it would be legitimate to wonder whether Tablet wasn’t inviting them in, on purpose. The cleverest invitation would be the one that can be easily denied with claims like, “Walt is not an anti-Semite; he’s a valiant scholar.” Thank you, Mr. Smith. This is something worth thinking about.

The Other Alansays:

July 21, 2010 - 6:58 pm

I’ll criticize Israel all day if its religion of choice remains Zionism.

RedPencilsays:

July 21, 2010 - 7:01 pm

Do the commenters make your point or what? Some innocently ignorant, some probably less so.

My advice: Do not sweep anti-Semitism under the carpet, but avoid using the word “anti-Semitism”.

Not because the word is “thrown around in defense of any criticism of Israel”. It seems to me that THAT line is thrown around pre emptively (“Don’t call me an anti-Semite! I’m just criticizing the NeoCon ZOG!” or whatever) by “anti-Zionists” much more often than actual accusations of anti-Semitism.

Nor because the word is “misused” though, yes, that does happen.

But because it is so god damned DISTRACTING. A lot of people for whatever reason really don’t understand. So to get them to understand, first you have to explain WHY a claim that the U.S. is “occupied” by Israel is anti-Semitic, give people an even more distracting lesson on what the Dreyfus affair was, explain that the Protocols of the Elders of Zion was NOT in fact written by Jews, and mention that Tevye the Dairyman was based on historical people…

And then with all of that history and logic and explanation over what a freakin’ word means, you run the serious risk of forgetting to say the most important thing, which is of course that the anti-Semitic sentiment you are arguing with is, morally and factually, WRONG.

So my opinion: Just say the anti-Semite (yes you can THINK it) is wrong, tell them politely how they are wrong, but try not to get too distracted with the dictionary/history game.

It is hard. I know. Sometimes it seems like it is such a simple short cut to say “anti-Semitic BS” when someone gives you (for example) a link to a series of articles on Jews’ ritual child murder. (Yes, the literal blood libel is still out there.) I don’t always follow my own excellent advice. But it is a source of endless distraction to bring the word up, and sometimes the anti-Semite escapes in the smoke.

A commenter on matters of Israeli domestic and foreign policy can receive no greater compliment than the transparent slander of a rabid Israel hasbara propaganda kook like the author here.

Keep up the good work, for you have no idea how much your efforts undermine your cause.

Johnsays:

July 21, 2010 - 7:27 pm

Jews are not the problem per se. It’s their vocal far-left that is the problem.

Fallonsays:

July 21, 2010 - 7:29 pm

I agree with the article. I have noticed the anti-Semetic commentators on mainstream political websites. The hatred is frightening and encouraged, unfortunately. by this administration.

Matthew Zurimsays:

July 21, 2010 - 7:32 pm

Why do people think Israeli or Jewish-American community controls congress anyway? Israel has an annual GDP of about 60 billion dollars a year. Let’s compare that to, oh say Exxon Mobil whose 2009 revenue was more than 310 billion dollars:

No, sir, it’s people like you who are making “anti-semitism” mainstream; every time you try to slander a person criticizing Israel’s atrocious behavior as an “anti-semite” you equate a view that is more and more commonly-held–that Israel is acting out of line, its behavior is unacceptable, and it is flagrantly abusing human rights–with genuine racial or religious hatred. True anti-semites are then able to more easily slip between the cracks because the actions of people such as yourself have made the term “anti-semite” almost meaningless by overusing it. It’s going to get worse and worse until you stop, realize the damage you’re causing, and accept that there are a large and growing number of people who’ve never had a bigoted thought in their lives making a good-faith judgment that Israel’s activities are unacceptable.

RedPencil writes: “So my opinion: Just say the anti-Semite (yes you can THINK it) is wrong, tell them politely how they are wrong, but try not to get too distracted with the dictionary/history game.”

I tend to agree with you that the use of the term is what has provoked this response. The problem with the article, though, is that if you remove the simple charge of anti-semitism, there is no reasoned argument explaining “how [Sullivan et al] are wrong.” The one commonality among all the authors attacked here is that they are extremely prolific writers who engage in protracted debates with readers and other bloggers regularly. You certainly saw that with the Wieseltier fiasco. Back it up with facts, and they’ll argue back in good faith.

ACSsays:

July 21, 2010 - 7:51 pm

“Israel is being asked – and all recent Israeli governments have agreed – to do what no country in history has been asked to do: give over territory to which it has long historical roots, which it obtained in a purely defensive war and which was not previously a legitimate part of any country. All Israel asked in return is (i) recognition of its legitimacy, (ii) recognition of its right to live in peace, (iii) recognition of its character as a Jewish state and (iv) minor border adjustments (for which it would fully compensate the Palestinians in the form of additional territory).”

Israel has been asked to retreat from territory which it is occupying in violation of international law. All recent Israel governments have agreed to do so. No Israeli government has actually accomplished this. You’re making an argument based on the long-standing demand by Israelis to judge Palestinians on their horrifying intentions (despite their utter ineptitude in carrying them out) and Israel on its good ones (despite its utter ineptitude in carrying them out.) Every reasonable person refuses to do so.

Israel has long-standing historical ties to Gaza and the West Bank. These historical ties were interrupted for 1800 yearsThis is a historical tragedy. But while this happened, other people — people not primarily responsible for the historical oppression of Jews — moved in and set up shop. Unfortunately, contrary to your hypothetical universe where this is a mere dispute about land, Palestinians are still there.

For Israel to take possession of the occupied territories would either require (a) the ethnic cleansing of the territories or (b) a literal system of apartheid, or (c) Israel ceasing to exist as a Jewish state. This boils down to one of two options: Israel ceasing to be a democracy, or Israel ceasing to be Jewish. Neither is acceptable, either to you or to Israel, and by using these greater-Zionist talking points, you’re disingenously pretending that it is.

Philsays:

July 21, 2010 - 7:58 pm

Wow, check out all the anti-Semitic bigots here hiding beneath a thin veneer of being against Israel. The fact is, the vast majority of rabid anti-Israel low lifes really hates Jews, but are too cowardly to admit it.

I agree. Evidently, these people write with such vehemence so often, they don’t recognize the shrill, predictable tirades they’re repeating over and over. Commenters like the bizarrely named ‘SkepticalHumanist’, Annie, Mike and Jason engage in some serious name calling and think they are the reasonable ones.

Jordy2010says:

July 21, 2010 - 8:16 pm

Arent Jewish far-left loons the same kind of monsters who organized the Soviet-Union and are responsible for the deaths of over 100 million human beings???? I see no difference between them and neo-nazis…… when they come into a chatroom they all hate Jews!!! The Mossad shud take care of anti-Israel jews……

Rob H.says:

July 21, 2010 - 8:18 pm

I don’t regularly follow Sullivan, Weiss or Walt, but I’m well-versed in Greenwald. If people want to tell themselves that he doesn’t traffic in anti-semitism, go right ahead. But just because he doesn’t say anything overtly anti-semitic, doesn’t mean he receives a get-out-jail free card. Greenwald routinely employs the most inflammatory of rhetoric to describe Israel’s actions and supporters. He uses the word “slaughter” so often, one would think it’s a conjunction. Other terms include “psychopathic derangement,” “psychopathic indifference,” “blood thirsty fanatic,” “sociopathic indifference,” and so on. Plus the constant tropes about how the Israeli lobby wields inordinate power in the United States. In 2007, before he got to Salon, he wrote an entire column about how “Jewish donor groups” were attempting to influence US policy.

Probably the best example of Greenwald’s leanings was when he posted a link to a video showing the aftermath of an explosion which was purported to be from an Israeli attack on a Gaza market during Cast Lead. Plenty of blood, bodies, and dismemberment, but it was footage taken in 2005 when a truckload of Hamas rockets exploded during a parade. Glenn, casting any hint of objectivity aside, leaped to post the video even though he stated that he could not vouch for its authenticity. Which begs the question: if he couldn’t, why did he post it? He’s never issued a clear apology or correction, something he routinely demands of ‘mainstream’ journalists.

And then there was his ridiculous statement in the first hours of the news of the flotilla that the people on the boats were “pure, unadulterated heroes.” Never mind the footage that emerged of people chanting about killing Jews and becoming martyrs, Glenn made up his mind that these people were all heroes, evidence be damned.

As to his comments section, the routine anti-semitic rantings begs the larger question: why do these people feel comfortable posting their garbage there? Answer that.

elisays:

July 21, 2010 - 8:51 pm

Henry says “You can even believe Israel has no right to exist and not be antisemitic. Just like you can believe Tibet shouldn’t be free and not be anti-Tibetan.”

No – saying Israel has no right to exist is anti-Semitic – and if it occurred it would be the start of another Holocaust.

And Tibet is being subject to genocide at this very moment because it is not free but subject to Chinese rule – that is about as anti-Tibetan as one can be.

Shingosays:

July 21, 2010 - 8:55 pm

Hello Lee,

I must admit to being flattered to be mentioned in the company of Phil Weiss, Greenwald and Stephen Walt, though it is odd that I should be accused of hate speech when in the same thread, a pro Israeli proponent threatened to “f##k my mother”.

FYI. I challenged those I was debating to refute my statement to produce evidence ( historical or archeological) that the state of Israel existed before 1948. I was quite willing to be proven wrong, but as I expected, all I was presented with were a handful if Wiki links that either referenced the Old Testament or included the caveat that they evidence was inconclusive.

For the record, I wish to state that I am not anti Semitic, in fact, my mother was Jewish. I have never said anything derogatory about Jewish people and have and will always condemned those who have. One of my biggest concerns about the I/P conflict is that it has contributed to the rise of anti Semitism, due in no small part to the insistence of people like yourself, that criticism of Israel is anti Semitic.

Peace

Ida Ksays:

July 21, 2010 - 8:59 pm

“why do people feel comfortable posting their garbage there?”

for the same reason you apparently feel comfortable posting your garbage here.

We are all truth seekers.
If what Weiss, Greenwald, Walt, and Sullivan publish is false, refute it. Otherwise, deal with it. Or are you afraid of the truth?

When I was a blogger at The Jawa Report, some years ago, I noticed a fresh resurgence of antisemitic comments at YouTube, LiveLeak, MySpace and other social networking sites. The sheer number, and geographical variety, prompted me to research and produce a 10 minute video about it:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FDVaJXmCIjk

Since producing this video, I have seen antisemitism growing by leaps and bounds, thanks largely to something not touched on by my video or this article: Internet trolls.

Over the past few years, I have become convinced that there are innumerable disinformation trolls who spend their days posting erroneous information, doctored photos, historical revisions, blood libels and every other sort of anti-Israeli, anti-Semitic filth they can wring from their twisted, hateful minds.

These people are either living off of their parents, living on welfare programs or are in the pay of groups devoted to undermining Israel. Often times they will form accounts at sites like YouTube, with blank profiles, and account names that consist of numerical entries, indicating a system for creating and maintaining countless profiles through the use of custom software.

A Freedmansays:

July 21, 2010 - 9:04 pm

ACS says “Israel has been asked to retreat from territory which it is occupying in violation of international law. All recent Israel governments have agreed to do so. No Israeli government has actually accomplished this.” Since when does taking territory in a purely defensive war constitute occupation in violation of international law? Certainly, Security Council Resolution 242 didn’t think so. And, ACS’s claim to the contrary notwithstanding, Israel HAS several times ceded territory and uprooted settlements. In fact, by withdrawing from the Sinai and the Gaza strip, it’s already given up over 90% of the territory it took in 1967. And it’s uprooted numerous towns for the sake of peace in the process – and received 12,000 explosive “gifts” from Hamas as its reward.

Conscientious Objectorsays:

July 21, 2010 - 9:23 pm

Hasbara Alert! Hasbara Alert! A Freedman’s in da house:

“Israel HAS several times ceded territory and uprooted settlements. In fact, by withdrawing from the Sinai and the Gaza strip, it’s already given up over 90% of the territory it took in 1967.”

Great A-Freed, then no problem with offering right NOW 90% of the 1967 borders to the Palestinians to conclude the “peace process,” right? We cool with that? If so, then there should be no problem with the Pals, right? They should accept your offer RIGHT NOW and that’s the end of it, right?

Oh, wait. . . there’s NEW FACTS ON THE GROUND. Ohhh. Well, thanks very much for keeping the “PEACE PROCESS” alive and kicking!

Banesays:

July 21, 2010 - 9:26 pm

So Bill Kristol and other Jews did not lobby the Bush administration to invade Iraq? Check your facts. 4,000 Americans dead and for what? So the Chinese can pump oil? Is no one allowed to question the Jewish lobby without being branded an anti-Semite? Sounds like a familiar trope: criticize Obama and you’re a racist!

Conscientious Objectorsays:

July 21, 2010 - 9:33 pm

Shingo . . . good to see you hto defend your good name. Lee Smith has published an abominable article, and used you in a way to tarnish Phil Weiss, Andrew Sullivan, Glenn Greenwald and Stephen Walt. I’ve never in my life seen such a lame, intellectually-lazy, intellectually-dishonest posting by a website of the caliber of Tablet.

Alana Newhouse needs to have a sit down with Lee Smith and tell him that Tablet has standards that require intellectual honesty and depth of research. The fact that Lee Smith did not even think of asking you to comment before taking your words out of context is egregious, and potentially a firing offense. Amateur hour at Tablet.

A Freedmansays:

July 21, 2010 - 9:37 pm

CO states that “Oh, wait. . . there’s NEW FACTS ON THE GROUND. Ohhh. Well, thanks very much for keeping the “PEACE PROCESS” alive and kicking!” I assume this statement is meant to make the point that the so-called “settlements” in the disputed territories are the obstacle to peace.
There are, unfortunately, several obvious truths that cannot be reconciled with the “settlements are the obstacle to peace” thesis:
• with the truth that before 1948, there were no “settlements” and there was
no peace.
• with the truth that between 1948 and 1967, there were no settlements and
there was certainly no peace.
• with the truth that for several years after 1967 there were no settlements of
any size yet there was continued refusal by Israel’s neighbors to talk to it, let
alone make peace with it.
• with the truth that Israel demolished the “settlements” in Gaza and was rewarded with 12,000 rockets, many fired from the very area previously occupied by the demolished settlements.
The reason that there was no peace before there were settlements, that there was no peace after there were settlements and that there was still no peace after Israel uprooted settlements is that this dispute is not about the “settlements” of Maaleh Adumim and Tekoah, but about the “settlements” of Tel Aviv and Haifa.

Congratulations Shingo for proving his point. Not very eloquently, but in more than sufficient quantity.
Anyone who questions the existence of a Jewish state in the Levant in ancient times is by definition an anti-semite.

Hershlsays:

July 21, 2010 - 9:54 pm

And how about anti-Israel, anti-American apologists?

Robert Wright, writing in the NY Times, has questioned why anyone would reject a mosque at the site where 3,000 Americans were murdered in the name of Islam and the rule of Mohammad.

Mr. Wright’s next step is to call for a picture of Bin Laden on the ten dollar bill.
He, like our president, believes that if we keep telling our enemies that we really like them in spite of their calls for our extermination, then they will play nice.

The 911 mosque idea is just the latest anti-Christian, anti-Jewish provocation that is dividing this country. Meanwhile, it is a crime to be a Christian in Saudi Arabia and Israel is being daily attacked by the left and their gun totting brethren around the world.

There is a war going on. Islam is the enemy. Get used to it. It will get much worse before it gets better. Ultimately ,the good guys will win but at what price?

This is a brilliant article. Well said. And Kafir is correct. I noted some ten years ago, when home for a time recovering from having my daughter that there were indeed trolls online seeminly endlessly printing up anti semitic garbage anywhere they were able. Now they seemed to have gone mainstream look they even come here claiming to be Jewish themselves a common theme of some of the most revolting haters of Jews out there.
I believe in the US at least that such monsters will never get the upper hand but certainly it makes me realize the need for the State of Isreal and understand the virus of anti semitism is indeed a light sleeper.

Shingo is now trying to paint himself like some sort of intellectual hero. This cannot be further from the truth. This man, despite overwhelming archaeological evidence, refuses to believe that the Israelis once ruled over a kingdom in the middle east. This alone is enough proof that he doesn’t know what he’s talking about.

Also, I was the one arguing with him, and i assure you, the Tablet did not take his statements out of context.

This is disturbing for several reasons :
1. It vilifies the writers by a kind of guilt by association reasoning, insinuating that they are providing a platform for racist commentators without taking any responsibility for the comments themselves, thus performing a kind of “ventriloquist” antisemitism. This is pretty silly.
2. It implies that those commenting are just loonies that have no real insight into the issues, but are venting their frustrations and spitting out conspiracy theories and shallow ideological rhetoric – and that the blogs that tolerate it are somehow not to be taken seriously.
3. If one looks at the various blogs and youtube sites on the ME, one will surely find far more casual racism pertaining to Arabs and Muslims, and extremely virulent – but the fact is that it is considered par for the course, and acceptable, so it raises little eyebrows in the American “intellectual” community.
4. There is no evidence offered to support the claims that these four writers express anti-semitic sentiments, and the author is conflating anti-semitism with criticism of Israel, a state – this is a fascist tendency. Are we to believe that when we criticize what the US is doing in AfPak, Iraq, Somalia, etc., that we hate Americans?
5. There are real antisemitic loonies out there. This IS a problem that will probably be exacerbated if Jews around the world do not address the conduct of Israel, I’m afraid.

The fact that this tired accusation is taken out and dusted off every time is that there are simply no other good arguments to make – it is a veiled threat, and the four targeted here should take it as such.

Now, all we need is a bearded bin Laden up there with them, and le tour est joué for the soft propaganda!

Jeremysays:

July 21, 2010 - 10:17 pm

Shingo’s okay; he’s got a Jewish mother! The complete ignorance about historical antisemitism drives much of this — to so many of these folks it’s restricted solely to the German racial variety.

Especially regarding the obsession with pro-Israel lobbies, there’s a reason why these fools take to the internet in huge numbers — where else are they going to be heard? They have literally zero political power in this country and their opinions are far outside of the mainstream of American opinion. And they can’t successfully advance their narratives ANYWHERE where it truly matters (and they also don’t seem to be bothered by sharing Middle East views with the completely illiberal, non-democratic, non-secular part of the Middle East) . They are tilting at windmills in a perfectly safe and self-reinforcing medium to engage in such behavior. When every attempt you’ve ever made to organize your position and move policy in the direction you would like has failed miserably, it must be frustrating and there just MUST be some alternate, i.e. conspiratorial, explanation other than that you’ve been judged to be full of shit.

Just begin asking them why they think the “Israel lobby” is so successful? That’s when it gets interesting. Could it possibly be because the facts are on its side and have been for all along? Maybe that’s why people who matter — hint: NOT Glenn Greenwald and Stephen Walt –trust the positions of these constituents?

The lack of self-awareness is just laughable: “hasbara” taunts, Zionist as a pejorative, Nazi comparisons for a political purpose, citing some Jewish ancestor somewhere, or even citing their own Jewish identity as if it immunizes the opinion itself….it’s all pathetic.

It’s best to just taunt their weakness. I’ll be sitting next to my Congressman talking to him about these issues; you’ll be outside on Constitution Avenue waving a huge, pink banner. Call it whatever you want, I call it winning.

Jeremy, you are correct. You should go on FP and let them have it. I take great pleasure in doing this myself. Shingo was getting pretty upset at his lack of historical knowledge on that Walt article. I also critcized Walt heavily, and my account was banned. I was also throwing in expletives which some people frown upon, but I insist it’s not as bad as being rabidly anti-Semitic. The joke about Shingo’s mother is nowhere near as bad as things such as using Zionism as a pejorative.

Patrick Folliardsays:

July 21, 2010 - 10:34 pm

The current Israeli prime minister has just been caught on tape saying in 2001 that he openly deceived president Clinton and has this view of how to deal with the Palestinians:

“beat them up, not once but repeatedly, beat them up so it hurts so badly, until it’s unbearable.”

Why is Netanyahu not an “open sewer of hate”? None of the writers the Tablet cites has ever written anything even faintly as disgusting or as racist as that.

Lee Smith is not a serious person.

Wayne Williamssays:

July 21, 2010 - 10:35 pm

Perhaps you should police the racist bile spewed about President Obama before you start labeling other writers. Start with your own publication and then I would recommend you check on Jerusalem Post where the favorite comparison of the President is always some black ape of some sort. The more vehement they are; the more they support Israel!

Mr. Smith’s article is not even good hasbara. It’s just silly name-calling. The failure to cite examples or to characterize the positions of the four alleged is intellectually lazy and renders the piece rhetorically ineffective.

Moreover, these four bloggers have quite different perspectives on the issues. Making an amalgam of them is a lot easier if you don’t describe where each is coming from.

The last thing the Zionists want is a debate over the issues. Much better to pretend it’s always 1938, and in blithe ad hominems, a Gentile who doesn’t toe the Zionist line is a Nazi or anti-semite, and a Jew who won’t drink the Zionist Kool-Aid is a “kapo,” or at least a “self-hater.” The number of people who fall for this sort of nonsense is shrinking daily.

Germanosays:

July 21, 2010 - 11:06 pm

Why publicize the photos of that bloggers? Are you hopping they be menaced by the right wings jews?
You’re more insane every day!!!

Mike Daytonsays:

July 21, 2010 - 11:08 pm

Mr. Smith should apply the principle of Occam’s Razor (i.e. that the simplest explanation is the best one) before he announces his hypothesis about what is going on. People the world over are critical of Israeli behavior. Almost every world body, respected international jurists, the UN General Assembly regularly votes 144 – 4 against Israeli atrocities. The four dissenting votes being the Israel, the U.S., the Marshall Islands and Palau. The hypothesis that Israeli behavior really is outrageous and worthy of condemnation seems a more simple explanation than a sudden unexplained and unwarranted worldwide outbreak of anti-Semitism amongst not only non-Jews, but also amongst Jews! Israel should clean up its act and make peace, and this would all go away.

dickerson3870says:

July 21, 2010 - 11:28 pm

RE: “The Mossad shud take care of anti-Israel jews……” – Jordy2010 ~ Jul 21, 2010 at 8:16 PM
MY COMMENT: Sadly, it would not surprise me if we see some of that. And I doubt that the U.S. government (especially Congress) would have the audacity to object.

Jeremysays:

July 21, 2010 - 11:28 pm

“Menaced by right wing Jews”! That’s a great one. Wait until Bill Kristol and PNAC issue their marching orders — nobody’s safe!

The other thing to note is that much of this is driven by the same few people. For example, Grumpy Old Man above used to drop in and practice his obsession over at Contentions when they still allowed comments. 99.9% of America doesn’t do this, so it tilts in favor of those whose obsession compels them to “MAKE THEIR VOICES HEARD!” Again, this is the only place their voices are heard, so I guess their need is understandable.

Another feel-good conspiracy: these issues just haven’t been given debate! Excuse me? For example, the “Israel lobby” has been debating these issues for decades with, among others, the Congress, various Administrations, the State Department, the Defense Department, etc. etc. US Mideast policy couldn’t be more debated if you tried. In Israel itself, as a free, liberal, democratic country, these issues are debated everyday. Sorry, GOM, nobody has ever felt the need to debate you.

But, again, to ease their soul, they take comfort in the notion that this issues lacks debate, and the Lobby just issues their marching orders. I mean, something has to explain why US policy has remained (and will remain for the foreseeable future) completely behind the idea that support for Israel is in this country’s strategic and moral interests.

As for Mike Dayton, one can’t be so stupid without bad faith. Israel should “make peace.” As if declaring it would just magically make it so. History will be lost on you, so I’ll stick to the moment, and I’ll assume you’re just referring to the Palestinians otherwise you’re just downright insane. Right now, 1 side is BEGGING the other to just have a chat; the other is waiting on approval from the Saudis, Yemen, Egypt, Libya, Syria, etc to get approval. Not even Arafat did this after ’74!

But I”m sure you have another Occam’s Razor that explains that!

RedPencilsays:

July 21, 2010 - 11:32 pm

Danny writes: “I tend to agree with you that the use of the term is what has provoked this response. The problem with the article, though, is that if you remove the simple charge of anti-semitism, there is no reasoned argument explaining “how [Sullivan et al] are wrong.”

Yes, that IS a problem. It would probably take a book not an article to detail how they are wrong, but maybe you could take one memelet at a time.

For example the “Project for a New American Century” which is mentioned in the story (and in the comments too!). I have actually read the 2000 document “Strategy, Forces, and Resources for a New Century.”http://www.webcitation.org/5e3est5lT Israel’s role in this is not mentioned. Iraq is, because its oil wealth make it helpful… for operations against China!

In fact in the PNAC the Middle East seems important only as a backdrop to what the authors (and from what I can tell the PNAC in general) believed would be the main focus of the century we’re in, namely a showdown with Communist China over the Far East. (!)

I will say the PNAC has so far been mercifully dead wrong as a predictor of current events. And critics who accuse PNAC of underestimating the difficulties let alone the horrors of war do not seem far from the mark. But as far as pushing an “Israeli agenda” or being an agent of an “Israel lobby” as “Conscientious Objector” does in a comment above? Where? I haven’t seen it. Is there a shred of evidence for this, or is it just the Jewish names on the masthead?

Jeremysays:

July 21, 2010 - 11:32 pm

Nope, no antisemitism here! Dickerson just alleged (with weaselly words like “i wouldn’t be surprised”) that it’s conceivable to him that the Mossad would initiate a campaign of targeted assassination against anti-Israel US Jews, and meanwhile the US Congress (we are left to assume why) would let this happen.

Lee Smith, you brought them out in full force….bravo!

Rob H.says:

July 21, 2010 - 11:41 pm

@Ida K

What did I say that was untruthful? Greenwald has written all that and more. Go ahead, refute something I wrote. You want to deny the video he linked to? You want to deny the columns he’s written and his own quotes? You want to deny that he lionized people chanting about killing Jews? If you’d be willing to entertain the thought that maybe, just maybe… Glenn Greenwald is fallible… you could open your eyes to the truth you claim to seek. And his comments section is often full of garbage and the puerile personal insults. That’s why he bans certain people and deletes their posts. Glenn has written about it. Or are you afraid of that truth?

JTsays:

July 21, 2010 - 11:58 pm

It’s not anti-semitism. It’s anti-asshole. Israel has an entire civilian population confined, living in garbage conditions, and every once in a while, they murder some of them, just to stir up resentment and provoke attacks, so they have a reason to douse the civs with white phosphorous. You cannot pretend to be in favor of peace as you are bulldozing peoples’ homes. Giving a medal to a soldier who murdered 6 people in international waters is not the sign of a civilized nation. That is the sign of a rogue state giving a giant ‘fuck you’ to anyone who still believes in justice.

Remember who violated the ceasefire on the day the world was watching the US elections.

I know it’s hard to separate attacks on your policies from attacks on your religion, but if you’re going to discuss issues like an adult, you can’t insist on always discussing the two together as if they were a single package.

I despise murderers, period. Yet only the Israelis are insulting enough to insinuate that my hatred of murder is offensive to them, and that my -real- reason for -pretending- to be angry at murder is because I hate Jews.

That’s laughable, and frankly, insulting.

Dannysays:

July 22, 2010 - 12:07 am

RedPencil:

I won’t disagree with you about PNAC’s (lack of) credibility. I also think that the relationship between their recommendations and their approach to Israel is a lot more complex than a simple “either/or” equation. Ultimately, the verdict on PNAC doesn’t really matter because if a handful of Jews are being influenced by their background and values, well, that’s not surprising and not really evidence of some terrible plot on behalf of some or all Jews anyway.

But Lee Smith cites PNAC with reference to Lobeblog or whatever. That blog doesn’t seem to have anything to do with the mainstream bloggers who are called “career anti-semites” in this article without any justification. Rob H. can try to argue Smith out of it in the comments, but it’s ultimately on Smith to make his own case or withdraw the slur. Until Smith does, I’m sitting this one out…

Lucchesisays:

July 22, 2010 - 12:13 am

Accusing defenders of Israel of being slavish, even child-like, in their devotion is another time-honored tactic of the anti-Israel troll. So also is the use of inflammatory language, as Smith pointed out. The intent is not to convince anyone of the alleged wrongness of Israeli policy, it is to get people angry so they give an emotional response that can be mocked. The intellectual disdain and moral certitude and condemnation, and the intensity with which they are expressed, are other cards in the same deck. Greenwald is an artist at it, no doubt most of the trolls popping up are coming from his delightful site. And to those banging the table and demanding proof, examples were provided by Smith. Reading what you’re condemning before you condemn it might be a good idea.
Of course, this opinion just means I’m a tool of Israel unwilling to open my eyes and discuss ‘the issues’ like ‘an adult.’ What you’re doing isn’t particularly clever, trolls.
Considering Greenwald’s sock-puppet past… That you Glenn?

No one with a sand grain of honesty, morality or integrity supports the vermin of israel.

Let Smith and similar imbeciles keep harping on “anti-Semitism” They are alienating everyone, other than the hard core Israel cult zombies. People are SO SICK of their disgusting idiocy, which has successfully rendered the term “anti-Semite” utterly meaningless.

The most probable cause for the flood of anti-Semitism on the net is one of the oldest of all: “money talks.”

Petrodollars flooding in from states hostile to Israel are saturating American and European media companies starved for advertising revenue, and they’re happy to feed at this new trough – no matter who’s filling it from the other side.

And that, I’m afraid, I don’t have a clever answer for.

Peter Hebertsays:

July 22, 2010 - 12:27 am

I am puzzled at the lack of intellectual honesty in equating anti-Semitism with criticism of Zionism as a political ideology, American policy in the middle east, and with Israeli policy. These are not the same things. The belief in racial inferiority of a political or religious group, I think, is at the heart of genuine anti-Semitism. The same can be said for Islam phobia. Attempts at shaming or ridiculing others for criticism towards policies delegitimates those engaged in the smearing for the purpose to silence since those actions seek to deflect attention away from the core issues. It seems that over the decades, the anti-Semitism card has been too often played for all of the wrong reasons leaving the charge meaningless and hollow. I point to Ben Stein’s appearance on CNN’s Larry King Live and his charge that Congressman Ron Paul (R-Texas) was engaged in “anti-Semitic” arguments due to his discussions on blow back from American foreign policy. Stein delegitimized himself in this case and only further validated the reasons for people to hate Jews – if that is what they want to feel. I believe that real anti-Semitism is blowback from this type of reckless attempt to manipulate public opinion. But, the reality is that criticism of Israeli policy and hatred of Jews are not the same. This is an apples and oranges argument.

Peter Hebertsays:

July 22, 2010 - 12:37 am

** The belief in racial inferiority of a culture, people, or religious group, I think, is at the heart of genuine anti-Semitism.

Jeremysays:

July 22, 2010 - 12:50 am

“No one with a sand grain of honesty, morality or integrity supports the vermin of israel.”

“Vermin” was a nice touch. Please outline what other people you categorize as vermin? I’m interested in where Israelis fit in your moral pecking order.

With that sentence, “Lovelyisraelis” has questioned the honesty, morality and integrity of every American president, 95+% of the US Congress for the last 60 years, and a vast, vast majority of the American people.

Peter, quit tilting. Nobody asserts that criticism of Israeli policy is hatred of Jews. Literally nobody thinks that. But you proved my above point about leftists only seeing antisemitism of the Nazi racial variety.

HongKongTexansays:

July 22, 2010 - 1:01 am

What strikes me as interesting is that there is no middle ground in the discussion. You are either ascribe the the school of thought that Israel-can-do-anything-because-its-neighbors-are-the-boogyman or you are in anti-Semite. So many adults loose it when talk turns to Israel. The media may have some impact on public perception of Israel, but it is the actions that Israel takes that people see (ie the flotilla raid). I first visited Israel when I was 24, George W. was still president, and regional tension was still high from the 2006 war. I hung out with Lebanese in Beirut and Israelis in Jerusalem, and do you know what? There is virtually no difference between people as people. Sure people have different views about politics, faith, etc, but all the people commenting here and authors like Mr. Lee have no idea what goes on the ground. When is the last time you have talked to a 20-something about Israel? Everyone brings so much internalized ideology with them, that pragmatism goes out he window.
If you want a scapegoat for anti-Semitism, why not look to this article? I read Sullivan and Greenwald, and no matter what you write, or what examples you take out of context, you will never change my mind that these men are agents of hate. This article, on the other hand, is an agent of demonization of authors who do not fit inside your ideological box.
So many ‘pro-Israel’ publications preach to the choir. But what is the Tablet (which I have never heard of before this article) doing to stop anti-Semite witch hunts? If Israel was concerned about it’s PR image, it should change its policies, but alas, I guess it has an army of professional journalists in the US to handle message control.
The thing is, I am more and more anti-Zionist. I love Jews, but the Zionist, territorial maximist political-theology is something I can not support. Maybe because I’m not Jewish, and alas, many of my Jewish friends are more hawkish than I. But know this: we can make peace.

Haimsays:

July 22, 2010 - 2:36 am

For me, the catchword is “arrogance”. Whenever you read about “arrogant” Israel, you know that the author is a closeted antisemite waiting to burst.

Superswedesays:

July 22, 2010 - 3:13 am

Dear Mrs Smith,

Your text is full of accusations – based on quotes from the comment fields of the blogs you mentioned.

If you accuse somebody for antisemitism (a very serious accusation), you should present evidence – not quote comments posted by others.

The internet is full of whackos – on both sides of the aisle. You accuse Mearsheimer and Walt for lack of evidence; I suggest you take a look at the evidence you just presented to build up your smearing article. Not one single quote from any of the authors you mention.

Never heard of The Tablet or Lee Smith before tonight. Good to see some articulate pushback on Smith’s shallow article.

Those of us who hope for some kind of peace on the eastern shores of the Mediterranean in our lifetime won’t be googling for Smith’s next article for inspiration.

Greenwald, Walt, Sullivan and Weiss have asked many important questions, none of them answered here.

Smith need not apply to be Andrew Breitbart’s new fact checker. Not qualified.

Richard Wittysays:

July 22, 2010 - 4:05 am

A lot of the same names that posted here, post frequently elsewhere.

One of the criticisms I have of blog journalism is a similar criticism to former advocacy journalism, or advocacy academia, that evidence is selected for purpose.

Criticism of Israeli policies is more than justified, it is needed. Americans and Israelis don’t get to see the direct or indirect effects of their policies and practices. Without full and candid disclosure, we can’t proceed to evaluation of policies, nor to reform (action).

There is no possible way of getting to live and let live without active dissent as an accepted norm (in American and in Israeli society in particular, and also in Palestinian, Arab and Islamic society).

But active dissent that only goes as far as active dissent also ignores critical and obvious political undercurrents. To contribute to social progress, it must engage the questions of what is the goal, and how to get there.

I post at Mondoweiss regularly (though seem to be on permanent and selective “moderation” status, presumably for my sympathies for “enough” Zionism, rather than expansionistic and rather than none. So much for opposition to editorial censorship.)

Hypocritesays:

July 22, 2010 - 4:30 am

Netanyahu: “beat them up, not once but repeatedly, beat them up so it hurts so badly, until it’s unbearable.”

Accepts the conclusions and recommendations contained in the report of the Commission of the Security Council (on settlements); determines that all measures taken by Israel to change the physical character, composition, institutional structure or status of the Palestinian and other Arab territories occupied since 1967, including Jerusalem, or any part thereof, have no legal validity and that Israel’s policy and practices of settling parts of its population and new immigrants in those territories constitute a flagrant violation of the Fourth Geneva Convention and also constitute a serious obstruction to achieving a comprehensive, just and lasting peace in the Middle East.

Strongly deplores the continuation and persistence of Israel in pursuing those policies and practices and calls upon the government and people of Israel to rescind those measures, to dismantle the existing settlements and in particular to cease, on an urgent basis, the establishment, construction and planning of settlements in the Arab territories occupied since 1967, including Jerusalem. Calls upon all States not to provide Israel with any assistance to be used specifically in connection with settlements in the occupied territories; and requests the Commission to continue examining the situation relating to settlements, to investigate the reported serious depletion of natural resources, particularly water, with a view to ensuring protection of those important natural resources of the territories under occupation.

Reaffirming the established principle that the acquisition of territory by military conquest is inadmissible, deplores the failure of Israel to show any regard for the resolutions of the General Assembly and the Security Council; censures in the strongest terms all measures taken to change the status of the city of Jerusalem; and urgently calls once more on Israel to rescind all measures taken by it to change the status of Jerusalem and in the future to refrain from all actions likely to have such an effect. Determines that in the event of a negative response or no response from Israel, the Security Council shall reconvene without delay to consider what further action should be taken in this matter.

DeepThoughtsays:

July 22, 2010 - 7:09 am

So let me get this straight…criticism of Israel is Anti- Semitism. Check!

Criticism of the Iraq war is anti- Semitism. Check!

Criticism of killing civilians on the aid flotilla by Israeli’s is anti-Semitism. Check!

Wow, I could go on but you get the point. We must meekly acquiesce to a pro Israeli policy.

Fnordsays:

July 22, 2010 - 7:45 am

Rrrright. You do realize that by labeling all people to the left of Nethanyahu as anti-semites, you create the very ground from wich anti-semitism rises? Ive been reading Jpost and other Israeli mainstream sites since Cast Lead, and sometimes have tried to argue with the hardcore right folks. Its impossible, they just start crying “anti-semite” in order to avoid arguing. In my country, Norway, that is deeply insulting. Maybe you all think you are helping Israel by insulting all who disagree with you. I think the opposite.

Walt proved your point Lee when he refered to you as ‘the lobby’. Anyone Jewish is ‘the lobby’ to him. My kids, your kids, and you calling him out on it is a very good thing.
Keep up your great work. Also, the comments here prove your point as well, the Tablet did a great job with this article and those of us who are current on the news and on blogs see that you are correct in your assessment.

Fnordsays:

July 22, 2010 - 9:01 am

callie: Get off it. Lee Smith is writing in a major jewish magazine. That doesnt qualify him as an “just another jew”. And the rhetoric he uses, that anyone he disagrees with is anti-semite is very lobby indeed, its been used as a club for 20 years now and is starting to loose its effect. If Smith is correct in his definition, then I and all my friends are anti-semites quite simply because we disagree with Israeli policies. And thats stupid.

JBBsays:

July 22, 2010 - 9:13 am

Other readers have been a good job putting this article in its deserved place. The toxic content of the piece aside, it is intellectually lazy, and offers little substantiation of either the main argument or any of its sub-arguments. This wouldn’t get a passing grade in any self-respecting undergraduate journalism class, which says a lot about Tablet’s standards.

I don’t think anyone is going to change anyone’s minds regarding this issue, so I have a suggestion:

Why doesn’t Israel just refuse the aid money and become an independent state? Dan Senor has written an article in The Wall Street Journal about how well Israel’s economy is doing, and Israel can even afford universal health care for it’s citizens. Israel can keep sending Israeli Bond beggers into our synagogoues during high holidays and we’ll cough up the dough, so money won’t be an issue.

If Israel does this, it can do whatever it wants without having to deal with Walt, Sullivan, the U.S., etc. To use Richard Perle’s phrase, A Clean Break.

Betsy Taylorsays:

July 22, 2010 - 9:26 am

I am so saddened to read this. Rather than reasoned discussion of substantive issues — you make blanket & highly steretyping condemnations of persons & imagine weird, hidden networks of pernicious influence. Why do you attack the messengers rather than the message? Is it because you fear that you will not be able to win the argument by fact-based, non-pejorative, reasoned debate? It’s so disorienting for many Americans to see this coming from a magazine dedicated to Jewish interests & life. For so many Americans, Jewish Americans have exemplified wonderful achievements in reason, broad humanitarianism, struggles for justice, scholarly brilliance — all qualities that should contribute to positive conversations between all sort of people & points of view. Research shows that anti-Semitism has largely died out in the US. You are making wild accusations & confusing concern with Israel’s actions & policies with anti-Semitism. Given the lack of significant anti-Semitism in the US, your approach will alienate ordinary Americans — pulling the ‘race card’ like this just gives the impression that you lack substantive arguments.

Avner Steinsays:

July 22, 2010 - 9:33 am

Antisemitism has become a legitimate political philosophy. Replace Jew with Zionist and it’s the same, bigoted xenophobic hatred.

“Anti-Zionism” was designed by the Soviet Union in the aftermath of the 67′ war.

The Soviet Anti-Zionist committees were run by communist Jews. Their goals were simply:

A) Justify Arab states need to expel their Jewish citizens by claiming they are more loyal to the Jewish state

Anti-Zionism is a legitimate political philosophy – those who oppose Israel because they believe it’s existence is premature and must come after Jesus returns or some crap.

But a new configuration of anti-Zionisms, which treats Zionism and the state of Israel as illegitimate Jewish enterprises.

Racial discriminatory against Jews is anti-Semitism. Applying principals discriminately on Jews only is anti-Semitism. Demanding Jews action based on standards that are demanded only from them is anti-Semitism. Sanctioning Jews for reasons used to sanction only Jews and no others for the same reason, is anti-Semitism. Denying Jews’ rights in their homeland is anti-Semitism. Delegitimizing Jews’ basic right for a country of their own in their homeland (regardless of borders) is anti-Semitism

Attacking Israel for its policies, actions, etc. is perfectly OK. NEVER shut-up doing that. If someone would run a world survey concerning citizens’ criticism on their own government, I won’t be surprised if it would find Israelis most critical of their own government.

Annasays:

July 22, 2010 - 9:35 am

Keep pushing folks. Keep pushing the I lobby and the disproportionate amount of influence and power they have on U.s. foreign policy out into the light.

Criticizing Israel’s brutal policies and the I lobbies persistent push for lop-sided legislation in regard to the Israeli Palestinian conflict is not “anti-semitic”

Some other great site for honest dialogue and facts are the Informed Comment, Washington Note, Race for Iran, Norman Finkelstein, Muzzlewatch.

Keep pushing

Fnordsays:

July 22, 2010 - 9:44 am

“Denying Jews’ rights in their homeland is anti-Semitism. ”

Is denying Palestinian rights in their homeland anti-semitism too? Last time I checked, the category semite includes both pals and jews.

FTWsays:

July 22, 2010 - 9:44 am

Jew-Haters are Legion and Israel provides a convenient focal point for their invective…and they are not all just Left-Wing Islamophiles…some of the most virulent examples can be found in the ostensibly pro-Israel bastions of Reaction…for example,Glenn Beck,John Hagee and those of their ilk…oh,for the Good Old Days when a man of the Left, like Sartre,made an articulate,compelling case for the right of Israel to exist and flourish…

Zvisays:

July 22, 2010 - 10:26 am

Fnord – a simple search in Wikipedia will provide you with a definition of the term Anti-Semite.
and to save you the trouble, here it is:

” Ant-Semite is prejudice against or hostility towards Jews, often rooted in hatred of their ethnic background, culture, and/or religion. In its extreme form, it “attributes to the Jews an exceptional position among all other civilizations, defames them as an inferior group and denies their being part of the nation[s]” in which they reside.[1] A person who practices antisemitism is called an “antisemite.”

Antisemitism may be manifested in many ways, ranging from individual expressions of hatred and discrimination against individual Jews to organized violent attacks by mobs or even state police or military attacks on entire Jewish communities. Extreme instances of persecution include the First Crusade of 1096, the expulsion from England in 1290, the Spanish Inquisition, the expulsion from Spain in 1492, the expulsion from Portugal in 1497, various pogroms, the Dreyfus Affair, and perhaps the most infamous, the Holocaust under Adolf Hitler’s Nazi Germany.

While the term’s etymology might suggest that antisemitism is directed against all Semitic peoples, the term was coined in the late 19th century in Germany as a more scientific-sounding term for Judenhass (“Jew-hatred”),[2] and that has been its normal use since then.[3][4]”

Gregsays:

July 22, 2010 - 10:33 am

I am a Jew and I do not support current Israeli government. Prime minister of Israel is not Moses. None of them are or ever will be. This site believes any Israeli government official is a Moses. Being against Israeli government, saying this is teh worst government there have ever been in Israel, saying Lieberman is the worst kind of nationalist is not the same as being anti-semitic. Moreoever, with nuclear weapons, with Israel controlling the fate of millions of non-Jews, with Israel being the strongest by far in the whole Middle East even talking about anti-semitism is ridiculous. It is no longer an excuse for my generation and it is no longer a motivation either. This is something that belonged in 20th century. Using it to smear others is just a tool employed by old timers who know their time is over. Get over it.

Lucchesisays:

July 22, 2010 - 10:37 am

“Rather than reasoned discussion of substantive issues” “Deeply saddened” “laughable” etc. are all the buzzwords of the pseudo-sophisticated troll. Nearly all these semi-serious responses deploring Smith’s article are composed almost entirely of strawmen. Don’t attack the message, attack the messenger by distorting his message in order to attack him. Make sure to use lots of prose you think makes you look even-handed and intelligent. Be sure to let everyone feel your pain. Also make certain to bring up the “we just disagree with Israel, why must you label all disagreement as anti-semitism?” canard.

It’d be amusing if Jewish (and Arab) lives weren’t put so unnecessarily at stake by people feeding the Arab fantasy that they will be unable to do in the shadows to Israel what they haven’t been able to do in the light. No one is fooled by these dishonest ‘thoughtful’ disagreements with Smith’s piece.

Lucchesisays:

July 22, 2010 - 10:41 am

And Greg, if you are a Jew (is there some kind of pamphlet out there entitled “How to harpoon Israel and give yourself moral authority” with rule number being “Claim you are a Jew or have Jewish relatives”?), you must be one of the most ignorant Jews around, to say that anti-semitism is a “20th-century thing.” The same goes to the foolish claims that the charge of anti-semitism is losing its force. Anyone who looks with open eyes at Arab (and too a far too great degree Islamic in general) media, education, and culture knows how untrue that is. Or we could look at the Soviet-inspired criticism of Israel made by Hugo Chavez, or in Europe. Funny how the anti-semitic image of Jews as conniving bloodsuckers is such a common thread from the Middle Ages right up to today, almost regardless of the ideology of the anti-semite. Sort of makes the claims of just being opposed to allegedly bad Israeli policies a bit hollow.

Annasays:

July 22, 2010 - 10:45 am

Claiming that legitimate and much needed criticism of Israel’s brutal policies and the I lobbies destructive push for lopsided legislation is “anti semitic” is another effort to pull the tried and true “anti semitic” card out of the deck. It’s not working any longer.

Keep pushing folks. Some great websites. If Americans Knew, End the Occupation, Council for National Interest.

stevesays:

July 22, 2010 - 10:51 am

Tremendous piece, Lee. One more tactic that should be mentioned is the immediate posting of offensive comments by anti-semites, as witnessed above. The goal of these people is not to convince, few or none would be convinced by what they write, but to drive thoughtful people away from the blog and dissuade people from engaging in intelligent discussion. The better web sites need to find a way to deal with this intentional sabotage of comment threads.

Annasays:

July 22, 2010 - 10:59 am

As Zvi point out the term “semite” has been co-opted too. As if wikepedia or the definition that Jews in the states have been able to corner is not the original definition of “semite”

But what Zvi also points out that the manipulated definition of “anti semite” only includes a hatred of Jews.

Mondoweiss, Andrew Sullivan, Glenn Greenwald are not “anti semites” no matter how you define the term. Phillip Weiss, Glenn Greenwald, Andrew Sullivan, Professor Juan Cole (over at Informed Comment), Steve Clemons (Washington Note), Counterpunch, and others have helped put cracks in the US MSM’s Israeli Palestinian conflict wall of silence built up over the last six or more decades. That is what Lee Smith is upset about. The wall of silence is coming down.

Listen to C-Spans Washington Journals the callers into that program are far more informed about the conflict, lopsided US policies, the power of the I lobby and how this disproportionate amount of power has and continues to be a danger to US National Security.

Although C Span completely ignored the Goldstone Report as well as Rachel Maddow, Keith Olberman, Chris Matthews, Dylan Ratigan, Ed..the wall of silence is still intact in our MSM.

Chris matthews showed the Israeli released tape of the Israeli soldiers hitting the deck and being beaten 9 times in seven minutes. Never showed what happened before ( Israeli soldiers shots fired etc) before the soldiers hit the deck . Never showed Iara Lees’ footage of the Mavi Marmara tragedy.

The wall of silence is still up in our MSM Mondoweiss, Prof Cole, Glenn Greenwald, Amy Goodman, Norman Finkelstein, Andrew Sullivan helping take the wall of silence down.

Annasays:

July 22, 2010 - 11:03 am

Those inflammatory and unsubstantiated claims are not working any more Steve. Some other sites that are helping bring down the wall of silence are at the Boycott Divest and Sanctions website, International Solidarity Movement,U.S. Campaign for the Academic & Cultural Boycott of Israel and Tikkun

It is instructive to read Walt’s attempted response to Smith on his blog and the subsequent comments. A few rationally refute Walt’s attempted defense; many are simple-minded anti-semitic screeds.

When one has offensive pests in one’s house, one reaches for the Raid. The comparable act for a blog is moderation by an editor who must approve all comments. It is abundantly clear that Foreign Policy has been either unwilling or unable to discharge this public responsibility for a very long time, instead reacting when the complaints can no longer be ignored by removing only the most extreme cases, and even then after a significant lag.

Given that Walt’s blog draws flies and has become a public nuisance through many of its comments, the rational response is for Walt to become a columnist, not a blogger with audience participation. Freedom of the Press only applies to those who own presses. Decent publishers have no obligation to publish the deliberately offensive opinions of those not under its editorial supervision or, come to that, any other opinions at all..

Putting it another way, Foreign Policy is not a common carrier but a publication; providing a venue for offensive comments in a publication (which claims the benefits, including protection of sources, immunity from seizure and other press privileges) IS an editorial act and thus editors are responsible for said content despite Walt’s brazen attempt to wash his hands of responsibility.

Lucchesisays:

July 22, 2010 - 11:08 am

It only took four minutes for someone to do exactly what I pointed out.

“But what Zvi also points out that the manipulated definition of “anti semite” only includes a hatred of Jews.”

Ummm no. Anti-semitism is hatred of Jews. Period. The term was created to mean that, was proudly taken up by anti-semites to identify themselves soon after it was created a few centuries ago, it has always meant that, and attempts to change it are not going to succeed.

The IDF did not fire first, regardless of what dishonest video manipulation and claims by the anti-semites on the Turkish ship may suggest.

I failed to find any assertion or even argument in Smith’s piece that Mondoweiss, Juan Cole, Greenwald, Goodman, or any of the rest are anti-semites. Again, the strawmen are out in force. Must be a lot of crows around.

Lucchesisays:

July 22, 2010 - 11:10 am

“Those inflammatory and unsubstantiated claims are not working any more Steve. Some other sites that are helping bring down the wall of silence are at the Boycott Divest and Sanctions website, International Solidarity Movement,U.S. Campaign for the Academic & Cultural Boycott of Israel and Tikkun”

I don’t think anyone is really interested in your advertising campaign for websites, individuals and organizations that have no problem with demonizing the Jewish state in classically anti-semitic ways regardless of the consequences and regardless of how they look. No matter how many times you drone on about “lifting the wall” or whatever nonsense, you’re still on the fringe, and there you will remain.

Are you getting paid to endlessly repeat this list of anti-Israel propaganda organs?

Annasays:

July 22, 2010 - 11:10 am

AT Mondoweiss

TIAA-CREF is the most ambitious divestment campaign yet

by Pamela Olson on July 22, 2010 · 1 comment
Like 1 2 Retweet

On July 9, 2004, the International Court of Justice found Israel’s Wall built on occupied Palestinian land to be illegal under international law. Israel disregarded the Court’s decision and continued to build wherever it pleased. It was one of Israel’s many violations of international law that the international community failed to enforce, and it was the last straw.

A year later, on July 9, 2005, Palestinian civil society called for the international community—individuals, organizations, companies, and governments—to boycott, divest from, and sanction Israel until it complies with international law and universal principles of human
rights, believing

There is a great piece by Barry Eisler called “The Ministry of Truth” over at a great blog Firedoglake/Seminal
“Recently, I had the good fortune to be invited by NPR to submit an essay on a favorite thriller of mine. I decided to write about George Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty-Four, which is both an excellent thriller and an increasingly powerful and relevant political warning — a combination readers of my latest novel, Inside Out, will know I find appealing.

Though I’m of course pleased that NPR decided to run the essay (which you can find here, along with an unrelated radio interview I did with Michelle Norris on All Things Considered), I’m also disappointed that NPR insisted on watering down the essay through successive drafts. The NPR editor I was in touch with, Miriam Krule, found the first three drafts “too political” (my response — that an essay on Nineteen Eighty-Four that’s too political is like an essay about the Bible that’s too much about God — was unpersuasive), and though Ms. Krule didn’t articulate the precise nature of her objections, the parts of the essay that had to go nicely demonstrate what in this context “too political” really means. Here are two versions of the of

Lucchesisays:

July 22, 2010 - 11:12 am

Or maybe Anna’s a bot, that could explain it too. Must have a lot of free time to endlessly copy and paste and advertise for unreasonable and comically (well, if it didn’t have such deleterious effects) harsh “criticism” of Israel. Criticism in the vein of a 14 year old whose boyfriend just broke up with her, maybe.

Annasays:

July 22, 2010 - 11:12 am

Lucchesi. You never know when the light bulb of truth will be turned on in peoples heads. Always worth trying All of the above mentioned sites are great sites for open honest factual debates and information

Annasays:

July 22, 2010 - 11:16 am

Lucchesi Nice try. Although trying to bait a fourteen year old is against the law.

Person speaking one of a group of related languages, presumably derived from a common language, Semitic (see Semitic languages). The term came to include Arabs, Akkadians, Canaanites, some Ethiopians, and Aramaean tribes including Hebrews. Semitic tribes migrated from the Arabian Peninsula, beginning c. 2500 BC, to the Mediterranean coast, Mesopotamia, and the Nile River delta. In Phoenicia, they became seafarers. In Mesopotamia, they blended with the civilization of Sumer. The Hebrews settled at last with other Semites in Palestine.

Lucchesisays:

July 22, 2010 - 11:18 am

“Although trying to bait a fourteen year old is against the law. ”

I really don’t know how you could misunderstand what I meant so badly unless it was deliberate, aren’t you the one trying to shine the light of truth and show us the path to open honest factual debates? Now you’re getting confused, maybe I’ve twisted you up too much.

Unfortunately, liberal American Jews—-but I repeat myself—-are abetting anti-Semitism by helping the hard-left destroy the very American institutions that protected them against it. Too, the politically correct non-critical thinkers graduated by American universities will be easily led from bias to pogrom. The last bulwark against full-blown persecution of Jews will be American Christians, ironically enough. Maybe never again. Maybe.

Lucchesisays:

July 22, 2010 - 11:22 am

Ah so now we’re up to posting definitions of words in a dishonest attempt to muddle anti-Semitism down to hatred of “semites”? What happened to honest open factual debating Anna?

The terms anti-Semite and anti-Semitism were coined in 1879 to describe anti-Jewish campaigns in Europe (central Europe particularly) at the time. It has nothing to do with Arabs or other lower-case semites.

Fnordsays:

July 22, 2010 - 11:24 am

“Ant-Semite is prejudice against or hostility towards Jews, often rooted in hatred of their ethnic background, culture, and/or religion.”

Zvi: that was my impression too. Thats why the sentence “Denying Jews’ rights in their homeland is anti-Semitism.” rings so hollow to me. Is it prejudice or hatred towards Jews as an ethnic group to question the “right” of jews to the land of Israel? Especially when we know that Judea and Sammaria is usually included in that definition? Thats an honest question, though I guess Smith would label it “jewbaiting”…

Lucchesisays:

July 22, 2010 - 11:32 am

Every people has the right to self-determination, that is, their own homeland and the ability to rule themselves as they see fit within it. Palestinians too. Denying Jews that right is the same as denying it to anyone else: it exposes a great callousness or malice towards the people. This may not necessarily be anti-Semitism, but historically there have been very few, if any, exceptions to the rule that if you oppose the right of the Jews to have a Jewish state, you are an anti-Semite.

At least you’re not plugging vapid left-wing echo chambers as locations of “Open honest factual debates” now Anna. Glad you’ve been cured of that, for at least one post.

Lucchesisays:

July 22, 2010 - 11:38 am

Or I guess that would be fnord, but really, when you all write in the same style, your posts tend to run together. Unconscious groupthink or collusion? Who cares really, the conclusions made about the remarks are the same either way.

Fnordsays:

July 22, 2010 - 11:42 am

“Every people has the right to self-determination, that is, their own homeland and the ability to rule themselves as they see fit within it.”

Is that really so? Then Im greatly looking forward to the new offensive from zionists on behalf of various N. American Indian tribes. Seriously, I think Israel-supporters do themselves a disfavour when calling for international rights in defense. You would be much better positioned if you argue from a realist stand, that Israel exists and discussions must relate to that. History is full of “nations” without sovereign territory.

Annasays:

July 22, 2010 - 11:42 am

Stephen Walt Responds over at Foreign Policy (another great site)
Stephen Walt responds
The problem with judging a blog by its commenters (updated)

The problem with judging a blog by its commenters (updated)
Posted By Stephen M. Walt Wednesday, July 21, 2010 – 4:25 PM Share

Even though I am on vacation with my family this week, I was planning to blog today about the Washington Post’s stunning series on the extraordinary expansion of America’s intelligence apparatus since 9/11. It is outstanding investigative journalism, and its authors — Dana Priest and William Arkin — deserve enormous kudos. I’ll share my thoughts on this matter later this week.

Instead of writing today about quality journalism, I unfortunately have to write about an article that fits squarely at the other end of the journalism spectrum. I refer here to the nasty column in Tablet magazine by Lee Smith, denouncing Glenn Greenwald, Andrew Sullivan, Philip Weiss, Jim Lobe and me for being “career Jew-baiters” and serving as facilitators of anti-Semitism.

As one might expect, the piece is long on invective and innuendo but almost completely devoid of meaningful evidence. Its only real value is to once again demonstrate the usual tactics that many of the so-called defenders of Israel employ against anyone who is critical either of Israel’s actions or of America’s special relationship with Israel.

Fnordsays:

July 22, 2010 - 11:43 am

Lucchesi: Hmm, maybe ever think that the unconscious groupthink may be yours?

Charlene Halesays:

July 22, 2010 - 11:46 am

The rants and hatred against Israel not to mention blatant bias and the war of propaganda waged against the miniscule but fabulous country Israel defies logic,
and reason. The Western media is morally bankrupt, blind and corrupt regarding
the treatment given to Israel.

I am a mature student who is going to study in England History at undergraduate
level starting September this year. I fear that if I stand for Israel and do
a disertation on the propaganda against Israel, and draw comparisons with Nazi
Germany propaganda against the Jews, I more than likely will fail- not because of
ability but because of daring to give a voice to the unpalatable truth.

Lucchesisays:

July 22, 2010 - 11:55 am

“Lucchesi: Hmm, maybe ever think that the unconscious groupthink may be yours?”

Fnord: ever think that supercilious too-cute-for-school questions do not really do anything but show you have the ability in spades to embarrass yourself?

“Is that really so? Then Im greatly looking forward to the new offensive from zionists on behalf of various N. American Indian tribes. Seriously, I think Israel-supporters do themselves a disfavour when calling for international rights in defense. You would be much better positioned if you argue from a realist stand, that Israel exists and discussions must relate to that. History is full of “nations” without sovereign territory.”

North American Indian tribes have sovereignty over their tribal land and rule themselves according to their own laws. You, sir, are ignorant of what you speak.

Seriously, I find it somewhat puzzling that using human rights principles to defend Jews is something you disapprove of. Dare I call you an anti-Semite? Just what is it about Jews that makes you think they are not entitled to the same protections afforded all peoples under these principles? Just because equality of outcome has not been assured historically? What a weak, and odious, argument.

Annasays:

July 22, 2010 - 11:59 am

More of Walt’s response over at Foreign Policy to Smith’s inflammatory and unsubstantiated claims. Walt wipes up the floor with Smith’ claims

“The first thing to observe about Smith’s screed is that even though he accuses me and my fellow bloggers of being anti-Semites and “Jew-baiters,” his article contains not a scintilla of evidence that Sullivan, Greenwald, Weiss, or I have written or said anything that is remotely anti-Semitic, much less that involves “Jew-baiting.” There’s an obvious reason for this omission: None of us has ever written or said anything that supports Smith’s outrageous charges.”

Smith therefore has to resort to a new and bizarre form of “guilt-by-association.” He attacks the four of us-and me in particular-by looking at some of the anonymous reader comments that appear in response to some of our posts. He finds that a few of those individuals who comment make some extreme statements, which he uses to argue that we are deliberately fostering anti-Semitism on our blogs. In other words, we must be anti-Semites because a handful of people whom we don’t even know — because their identities are secret — are commenting on our posts. (It’s not clear how this applies to Sullivan, by the way, because his blog doesn’t have a comments thread.)

The problems with this line of argument should be obvious. First, people of all persuasions write in to disagree — sometimes vehemently — with my views on Middle East policy, and that includes individuals who defend Israel down the line. So, one could just as easily use the comments thread to argue that I am providing a platform for pro-Israel hasbara. Second, any website that deals with Middle East subjects, especially Israel, will inevitably attract some wing-nuts. Just take a look at the comments on New York Times or Washington Post pieces dealing with Israel, or even better, check out the “talk-backs” in the Jerusalem Post or Ha’aretz. There is virtually no difference between what you will find at those T

Lucchesisays:

July 22, 2010 - 12:00 pm

Annabot, Annabot, where are you now… they just can’t give up.

As I’ve pointed out over at Walt’s blog, he engages in precisely the behavior I and others have described here, typical of those obsessively anti-Israel. Annabot can talk about the floor all she wants, the only ones wiping themselves on it are Walt and his defenders.

Ken Richard Silverstein notes who helps fund a magazine that baselessly calls critics of Israel’s policies “Jew-baiters.” No big surprise. He makes a good point here on tarring bloggers with the views of some commenters:

Smith, of course, neglects the fact that the Talkbacks of the Israeli online news media are among the most vicious, disgusting, racist and genocidal I’ve ever come across. Does this mean that we should accuse Haaretz, Ynet and Maariv of favoring the views of their readers? If so, where does it end? Should we bring Amos Schocken, Amnon Denker and all the editors of these publications up on charges of racism and incitement?

This suggests there was some shred of argument in the piece. There wasn’t. It was just low rent Wieseltierism.

Lucchesisays:

July 22, 2010 - 12:09 pm

Ah yes the good old “but you aren’t calling out your own side!”

I wasn’t aware that the subject of the piece was “Tolerating extremism and intolerance in the Middle East discussion,” it was anti-Semitism on the internet.

And of course Sullivan’s lack of self-awareness makes the first paragraph typically amusing. Yes Andrew, JOOOOOOOOS are behind this. I wonder, are attempts at taking away the legitimacy of criticism by saying that Jews are behind it examples of anti-Semitism?

My first comment isn’t appearing, because of the links maybe. So be it.

This is disturbing for several reasons :
1. It vilifies the writers by a kind of guilt by association reasoning, insinuating that they are providing a platform for racist commentators without taking any responsibility for the comments themselves, thus performing a kind of “ventriloquist” antisemitism. This is pretty silly.
2. It implies that those commenting are just loonies that have no real insight into the issues, but are venting their frustrations and spitting out conspiracy theories and shallow ideological rhetoric – and that the blogs that tolerate it are somehow not to be taken seriously.
3. If one looks at the various blogs and youtube sites on the ME, one will surely find far more casual racism pertaining to Arabs and Muslims, all virulent – but the fact is that it is considered par for the course, and acceptable, so it raises little eyebrows in the American “intellectual” community.
4. There is no evidence offered to support the claims that these four writers express anti-semitic sentiments, and the author is conflating anti-semitism with criticism of Israel, a state – this is a fascist tendency. Are we to believe that when we criticize what the US is doing in AfPak, Iraq, Somalia, etc., that we hate Americans?
5. There are real antisemitic loonies out there in the grips of conspiracy theory mentalities. This IS a problem that will probably be exacerbated if Jews around the world do not address the conduct of Israel, I’m afraid.
6. This is not only about Israel, it is also about freedom of speech, and those who would like to slander others in order to tarnish their reputations – look at the recent Shirley Sherrod case. It is a broader issue, and a very important one.

The fact that this tired accusation is taken out and dusted off every time is that there are simply no other good arguments to make – it is a veiled threat, and the four targeted here should take it as such.

Lucchesisays:

July 22, 2010 - 12:16 pm

Congratulations on your list of strawmen, Rob. Very conventional, very boring. Especially number 2. And number 3, have you ever heard of the term “red herring”? Look it up.

And of course, we have the ‘I’m a defender of free speech and I’m implying you’re a fascist’ accusation in number 6.

Par for the course. You’re going to have to do better than this.

Lucchesisays:

July 22, 2010 - 12:17 pm

Oh and in number four the dead horse of “conflating criticism of Israel with anti-Semitism” makes an appearance. You’ve hit all the ‘high’ notes, Rob! Good job!

Lucchesi : Wow, that was quick. It’s this kind of rapid response that makes me suspicious. I’ll take that as a “yes”, as you haven’t addressed any of the arguments. I don’t want to get into a row with anyone here, but this kind of hollow, emotional response doesn’t cut it. I’d love for you to talk about the issues with substance. Please go on.

Code words :
“red herring”
“strawmen”
“beating a dead horse”

Fnordsays:

July 22, 2010 - 12:43 pm

Lucchesi: Wow, you managed two arguments before you called out the anti-semite card. As for every socalled “people” having the right to their own sovereign state according to UN princiuples of Human Rights, thats a new one for me. Your point is that anyone who thinks the palestinians have an equal right to their homelands as the jews is anti-semitic. Yet your definition of anti-semitism is hatred of jews. How do those two points add up? Am I a lapp-hater for saying that I do not think that northern scandinavia should be ceded to the laps? A Basque-hater when I think that a united Spain is better than a Basque nation, and that their campaign of terror is illegal?

From a realist pov, you avoid those silly universal questions.

Lucchesisays:

July 22, 2010 - 12:54 pm

A fine case of lack of self-awareness, Rob. Code words, emotional response, etc. It’s a shame that rather than discuss the real issues, we must instead spend our time attacking the tactics of the other. But as distasteful as it is (mostly because it simply drags on and on and on), it needs to be done, I believe I’ve made my case far more persuasively than you, fnord, Annabot, or any of your compatriots have.

“Your point is that anyone who thinks the palestinians have an equal right to their homelands as the jews is anti-semitic”

No, actually my point was that both Jews and Palestinians have a right to self-determination, in my belief. I thought that was very clear. Do you have problems with reading comprehension? Of course not.

Your strawman is typical, and I would say you’re no longer worth responding to except that you will no doubt continue in this vein for as long as you wish. Have a nice time being a conventional fallacy-loving dishonest Israel-basher.

Lucchesisays:

July 22, 2010 - 12:58 pm

I also said callousness or malice, and made what I thought was a rather clear distinction between those two things and anti-Semitism. I guess not. Or rather, I guess you didn’t read my post, or read it as you wanted to read it, not as I wrote it. Again, these endless recriminations of tactics are distasteful, but only because you insist on employing them in every single comment of yours.

Walt’s response to Lee Smith’s “Mainstreaming Hate” — hat-tip to Anna — is pitch-perfect. Whenever there’s any legitimate criticism of Israel AS A NATION, and there is no intellectually acceptable response (as in the use of white phophorous on women and children in Operation Cast Lead), you get a Lucchesi popping up blabbering “anti-Semite! anti-Semite!”

Unfortunately, the overuse of this term has reduced its currency substantially in the last few years. Lucchesi’s attack on Rob, for example, has about the same impact as Lucchesi says: “Oh yeah, Rob? Well, you’re a doody-head.”

That’s the real danger of conflating any criticism of Israel as anti-Semitism, de-legimization, or seeking its destruction.

Lucchesi: True or false — the following statement is anti-Semitic on its face:

“In order for Israel to become part of the alliance against whatever we want to call it, religious barbarism, theocratic, possibly thermonuclear theocratic or nuclear theocratic aggression, it can’t, it’ll have to dispense with the occupation. It’s as simple as that.

“It can be, you can think of it as a kind of European style, Western style country if you want, but it can’t govern other people against their will. It can’t continue to steal their land in the way that it does every day. And it’s unbelievably irresponsible of Israelis, knowing the position of the United States and its allies are in around the world, to continue to behave in this unconscionable way. And I’m afraid I know too much about the history of the conflict to think of Israel as just a tiny, little island surrounded by a sea of ravening wolves and so on. I mean, I know quite a lot about how that state was founded, and the amount of violence and dispossession that involved. And I’m a prisoner of that knowledge. I can’t un-know it.”

That’s Christopher Hitchens on a radio show last weekend. Is that what Lee Smith would call “Jew-baiting?”

Lucchesisays:

July 22, 2010 - 1:17 pm

““In order for Israel to become part of the alliance against whatever we want to call it, religious barbarism, theocratic, possibly thermonuclear theocratic or nuclear theocratic aggression, it can’t, it’ll have to dispense with the occupation. It’s as simple as that.”

I disagree with the statement but I find no anti-Semitism in it. I also do not believe that Israel should continue occupying the West Bank or Gaza Strip forevermore. I also do not believe that the vast majority of settlements in the West Bank should remain.

But I do certainly not believe that the Palestinians, as their politics currently exists, would be able to administer a sovereign nation in a way that terrorist attacks against Israeli civilians would not be a habitual occurrence.

“That’s Christopher Hitchens on a radio show last weekend. Is that what Lee Smith would call “Jew-baiting?””

No, I do not believe he would. I cannot speak for him, however, and would not wish to.

Nice strawmen by the way CO. You’re really living up to the standards of your handle there.

Then you call me a “strawman.” Strawman? On what basis? Hitchens’ words are precisely the type of meaningful debate we should be having on the topic. So how do you define “strawman.” Seems like merely another dismissive perjorative without basis or substance (like “troll”).

Lucchesisays:

July 22, 2010 - 1:25 pm

“Then you call me a “strawman.” Strawman? On what basis? Hitchens’ words are precisely the type of meaningful debate we should be having on the topic. So how do you define “strawman.” Seems like merely another dismissive perjorative without basis or substance (like “troll”).”

That was in reference to your defense of Rob, and I stand by it. It was a misrepresentation of what I said.

Tom Bishopsays:

July 22, 2010 - 1:28 pm

It is a dangerous delusion to claim that Christian Zionism has the interests of the Jewish people at heart as stated by a previous poster. See this article on Talk to Action:

Hagee Markets New Prophecy Book While Claiming CUFI Not Motivated by End Times @

Lucchesi : “it needs to be done, I believe I’ve made my case far more persuasively than you, fnord, Annabot, or any of your compatriots have.”
Actually, you haven’t made any case at all as far as I can tell. I’m still waiting. You seem to be confusing “defending” a cause with actually offering arguments and true statements. It’s not enough to simply type words, you actually need to make sense – I have to say, you’re not addressing the substance of anyone’s statements, and you’re being rather ad-hominem and arrogant. This is the hallmark of someone who doesn’t really know what he is saying, and it’s precisely the kind of thing this “article” purports to address.

bordenlsays:

July 22, 2010 - 2:53 pm

Posts about Israel will get an inordinate number of comments at any secular political blog which I frequent which has comments because the issue is so raw. This does not mean that the secular political blogs do not write about any number of other things or think that they exist to write about those other things. Daily Kos is an excellent example. This is a blog which exists to elect Democrats, there are many Jewish commenters who are honored by the community, and the main page is almost free of writing about Israel, but the diaries are full of ugly invective whenever Israel gets into trouble. So the author has proved nothing by saying that Walt’s Israel posts get more comments than the others.

I think I am familiar with the about six things that Glenn Greenwald regularly writes about. One of those six things is questioning United States blind support for Israel. That is different from Jew-baiting, because not everyone who blindly supports Israel is Jewish and not every Jewish person blindly supports Israel.

Lucchesisays:

July 22, 2010 - 2:53 pm

“Actually, you haven’t made any case at all as far as I can tell.”

Which isn’t far, but that’s okay. I’m not here to impress you.

“I’m still waiting.”

The likes of you will be waiting a long, long time.

“You seem to be confusing “defending” a cause with actually offering arguments and true statements.”

Lololol projection much Rob?

“I have to say, you’re not addressing the substance of anyone’s statements, and you’re being rather ad-hominem and arrogant. ”

Roflmaooo projection much Rob?

“This is the hallmark of someone who doesn’t really know what he is saying, and it’s precisely the kind of thing this “article” purports to address.”

Roflcopter projection much Rob?

When you have something serious to say instead of beating dead horses like anything you’ve said isn’t a way to shut down debate instead of foster it and like it hasn’t been said by people like you a million times before Rob, feel free to say it. Until then, have fun posting to read yourself post.

bordenlsays:

July 22, 2010 - 2:55 pm

(This article is really below the standard I expect from Tablet)

Lucchesisays:

July 22, 2010 - 2:58 pm

“Oh, now I get it. Strawman = you doodyhead. Perfect. LOL!”

Yes because that is what I said. Perfect. LOL!

Tell me is there something about being so caustically critical of Israel that turns people into 8 year olds?

As for Mr Lucchesi , well, I rest my case – now does everyone see why pieces about Israel/Palestine tend to get so many comments? Most of it is fluff, and those who are trying to get a straight answer out of those who are incapable of providing one. I think I’m a little to old for this one, carry on without me…

Richardsays:

July 22, 2010 - 3:04 pm

At least being 14 years old explains why you have no accurate understanding of the issues, Anna. What excuse do the others have?

Lucchesisays:

July 22, 2010 - 3:04 pm

What case are you resting? You brought out almost every tired dishonest talking point used against defenders of Israel in the book, and the biggest one of all is that you’re just trying to get an honest debate – while attacking anyone who dares to say “no, you are not” as proving your point that you can’t get an honest debate. “Rest your case,” Rob, you won’t be missed. Fluff indeed.

Really, do people like Rob think that they are clever when they try to pull their crap?

I don’t think it’s really necessary to respond to this rather contentless article — when even Ron Kampeas accuses you of engaging in a right-wing smear job it’s a good sign that your piece was a dud — but I’ve written a brief response on Lobelog: http://www.lobelog.com/lee-smith/

Lucchesisays:

July 22, 2010 - 3:34 pm

Appeal to Jew alert!

Thank you Daniel for contradicting yourself in the space of a single unreasonably long, terribly written sentence.

I wasn’t aware that “brief” meant four paragraphs, two of them so long that I wonder if you forgot where the “enter” key on the keyboard is.

The real question is, did Lee Smith hit a little close to the mark? Maybe that’s why you’re so worked up over something you repeatedly claim is trivial that you suggest Mr. Smith should lose his job. Bravo, Daniel, you certainly do know how to confuse yourself.

ahad ha'amoratsimsays:

July 22, 2010 - 6:10 pm

Zvi, you are not the first person to explain to fnord that people who hated Jews coined the term anti-Semitism as a scientific sounding replacement for Jew hatred (or Judenhass in the language of those who coined it). He knows what it means. He doesn’t care. Any time you see someone quibble that anti-Semitism includes bias against Arabs, you can be reasonably you are reading the ravings of an anti-Semite, or at best someone who has been living in a cave for the last two centuries.

Lee I am an avid reader of the Tablet and also follow the media coverage on the Middle East and Israel very closely and have since 1998 when my daughter was born.
I agree totally with your article and you are brave to have taken a stand on it.
Good for you, and thank you on behalf of all our children for your courage.
If only other mainstream Jewish writers and publications would wake up and start talking about what is out there instead of pretending it will just go away on its own.

Avner Steinsays:

July 22, 2010 - 8:16 pm

“Is denying Palestinian rights in their homeland anti-semitism too? Last time I checked, the category semite includes both pals and jews.”

No on is denying Palestinian rights in their so-called homeland. Palestinians are world-recorder holder in humanitarian aid, their right to state supercedes everyone else.

They’ve been offered a state half a dozen times, with billions in free aid – and yet they reject it, instead preferring to remain under “occupation” and continue to claim they are being denied self-determination even though Israel was the only country to agree to the partition.

And if you didn’t know, the Arab states OCCUPIED THE PALESTINIANS FOR 20 YEARS. No settlement existed in Jerusalem, West Bank, or Gaza – and yet no Palestine was created.

In fact, the original PLO charter explicitly rejected Palestinian self-determination and regulated the land to Egypt and Jordan, the true occupiers.

It wasn’t until Israel invaded did the Left show up and say it’s time to create a Palestine, even though none had existed and no Arab organization had interest in carving one up.

human rights are universal. Palestinians could have had a state a long time ago. But Palestinians do not have a right to terrorism, murder, and antisemitism.

The Left exaggerates and maximizes the plight of the Palestinians to justify their rejectionism as if Israel is such a horrible entity that it deserves the pointless aggression.

Palestinians offer nothing to society. The Arabs hate them. The Palestinian leaders abuse them. The Left exploits them to demonize Israel. Notice how they say nothing about how the Arabs treat them in Lebanon, Saudi Arabia, or Egypt.

Walt/M have been owned time and time again for manipulating history and peddling distorted facts. Benny Morris was quite pissed that they manipulated his work in their book: http://spme.net/cgi-bin/articles.cgi?ID=434

The left says they aren’t antisemitic, but they lobby for avid consumers of antisemitism. Birds of the feather

I am curious about your justification for demanding that certain “egregious posts” be taken down. Some of these posts are hard to challenge- or at least, would be if their author were to cite some other sources. For instance, you mention a commenter named Rowan Berkeley saying that “It seems to me that it is no exaggeration to say roundly that the USA in its entirety is under Jewish control of one variety or another.”

You’re saying that’s an outrageous anti-semitic quote?

How is an observer to distinguish that from this:

“I know what America is. America is a thing you can move very easily, move it in the right direction. They won’t get in the way.”

That’s Ben Netanyahu speaking, of course. So to say that the USA is under Jewish control with respect to Israeli issues- well, that’s pretty much what Netanyahu thinks, isn’t it?

I hardly think Mr. Netanyahu qualifies as an anti-semite- do you?

Stevesays:

July 22, 2010 - 10:03 pm

>”There was a time when American publications could easily ward off the fringe population of semi-literate paranoids and shut-ins who seek admission to mainstream American intellectual life by writing crazy letters. Editors of magazines like The New Yorker didn’t particularly care what their readers had to say”

Yes, yes. Lee’s entire article here could have been boiled down to that single thought – that people who think things Lee dislikes should not be permitted to speak on the public stage.

I’m underwhelmed by the remarks Lee culled from various comment sections. You think that’s hate? Buddy, you don’t know what hate is. Read the comments written on the topics of Rush Limbaugh or Sarah Palin to get your hate meter properly adjusted.

Thank you for the excellent article. You look into the root of it: anti-Semitism attracts traffic, the same as sex and celebrity gossip. All the publications now compete for this swarm of nobodies, who can feel important by spewing their hatred publicly. It is why the serious publications invite prominent anti-Semites and encourage anti-Semitic comments. Ant-Semitism sells.

Annasays:

July 23, 2010 - 8:48 am

“in polite conversation, as conspiracy theorists peddled the idea that Jewish-American officials and their colleagues in the media had pressed the United States into making war with Iraq to serve the interests of Israel.”

PNAC (Project for a New American Century letter to President Clinton
At the PNAC website
“January 26, 1998

The Honorable William J. Clinton
President of the United States

Washington, DC

Dear Mr. President:

We are writing you because we are convinced that current American policy toward Iraq is not succeeding, and that we may soon face a threat in the Middle East more serious than any we have known since the end of the Cold War. In your upcoming State of the Union Address, you have an opportunity to chart a clear and determined course for meeting this threat. We urge you to seize that opportunity, and to enunciate a new strategy that would secure the interests of the U.S. and our friends and allies around the world. That strategy should aim, above all, at the removal of Saddam Hussein’s regime from power. We stand ready to offer our full support in this difficult but necessary endeavor.

The policy of “containment” of Saddam Hussein has been steadily eroding over the past several months. As recent events have demonstrated, we can no longer depend on our partners in the Gulf War coalition to continue to uphold the sanctions or to punish Saddam when he blocks or evades UN inspections. Our ability to ensure that Saddam Hussein is not producing weapons of mass destruction, therefore, has substantially diminished. Even if full inspections were eventually to resume, which now seems highly unlikely, experience has shown that it is difficult if not impossible to monitor Iraq’s chemical and biological weapons production. The lengthy period during which the inspectors will have been unable to enter many Iraqi facilities has made it even less likely that they will be able to uncover all of Saddam’s secrets. As a result, in the not-too-distant fu

Annasays:

July 23, 2010 - 8:49 am

At the Aipac website everyday in 2000,01,02,03 the Take Action section was completely pushing for the invasion of Iraq

Lee Smith “in polite conversation, as conspiracy theorists peddled the idea that Jewish-American officials and their colleagues in the media had pressed the United States into making war with Iraq to serve the interests of Israel.”

No Jewish American official influence here At the Project for a New American Century

January 23, 2003

The Honorable George W. Bush
President of the United States
Washington, DC

Dear Mr. President:

We write to endorse the bold new course you have charted for American national security strategy. Your administration has shown impressive leadership in recognizing new threats and seizing new opportunities to create an enduring “balance of power that favors freedom.” Yet a great risk remains: a continuing lack of military means. For the fact is this: Our current level of defense spending is inadequate to meet the demands of the Bush Doctrine.

American strength is key to building the new world you have envisioned. The victory over the Taliban in Afghanistan was an essential first step in stabilizing that chaotic country and toward destroying the al Qaeda terrorist network. The international community and an overwhelming military coalition are now ready to end the threat of Saddam Hussein’s regime in Iraq.

Yet a multitude of threats elsewhere call into question our ability now, and in the future, to defend adequately our interests and our principles around the globe. Removing Saddam is but the first step toward reconstructing a decent government in Iraq and carrying out your strategic vision for the Middle East. Other rogue states remain a major problem. Indeed, we now confront the two-war scenario: Even as we deploy forces for war against Iraq, North Korea has abrogated its agreement to terminate its nuclear weapons development and threatens war if it is not appeased. The third member of the “axis of evil,” Iran, has likewise stepped up its nuclear efforts.

Annasays:

July 23, 2010 - 9:36 am

More from that letter from the PNAC to President Bush. No effort to influence here:

“Meanwhile, the war on terrorism, as you predicted, is being “fought on many fronts against a particularly elusive enemy over an extended period of time.” We have deprived al Qaeda of its sanctuary in Afghanistan and are preparing to expand our presence out of Kabul into the surrounding provinces. But the war is also carrying U.S. troops across the border into Pakistan, and we also have committed ourselves to a long-term military presence in Central Asia. And the attacks in Bali – intended in part to target Americans – and in the Philippines – where we have troops aiding and advising the Filipino army – show how this war has spread to Southeast Asia.

In East Asia, China, as your own administration says, is “pursuing advanced military capabilities that can threaten its neighbors” – our democratic allies – and derail its own internal political and economic modernization. With U.S. troops stretched as they are, it is a serious question of whether we could respond adequately to a Korean crisis or a sudden confrontation in the Taiwan Strait. And, lest we forget, American troops continue to keep the peace in the Balkans and in the Sinai, and patrol countless other global hotspots.

In sum, there is an increasingly dangerous gap between our strategic ends and our military means, and the Bush Doctrine cannot be carried out effectively without a larger military force.

By every measure, current defense spending is inadequate for a military with global responsibilities. Ten years ago, America’s defense burden was 4.8% of GDP. Although the decline in defense spending has been halted, we have not done nearly enough to make up for this decade of neglect. The modest increase planned for next year will still leave Pentagon spending at about 3.4 % of GDP, and Congressional Budget Office projections are that the proportion will decline to approximately 3% by 2007.”

Annasays:

July 23, 2010 - 9:37 am

More of that letter and signatures.

No effort to influence here:

“nadequate funding results in an inadequate force. Today’s military is simply too small for the missions it must perform. A reduced active-duty force means an increasing reliance on reserve troops, not just in times of war but to meet daily presence requirements. Inadequate modernization programs have also slowed the normal and necessary replacement of planes, ships and equipment; indeed, to make up for the “procurement holiday” of the past decade, tens of billions more over the next decade will have to be spent than is currently budgeted. And, finally, inadequate research spending has hampered the development of missile defenses and is delaying the transformation of our conventional forces and the exploitation of new technologies.

To rebuild, transform, and man our military adequately for its many missions and responsibilities, defense spending will need to be increased by an additional $70 to $100 billion. This would bring defense expenditures to 3.8% – 4.0% of GDP in 2007. Less than a nickel on the dollar for American security in the 21st century is cheap at the price. We urge you, Mr. President, to make it a legislative and budgetary priority to increase defense spending to these levels over the next few years in order to ensure that the security challenges we face are met.

Anna you are straight up out like someone you spent too much time studying the Protocols of the Elders of Ziyon or the Turner Diaries. You totally prove Lee’s point.

The vast majority of Jews, some 80 plus percent opposed the war in Iraq. Jews voted for Obama in overwhelming numbers as well. The handfull of Jewish names on the list you provide does not change that. And would you seek to indite us ALL because of the stupidity of a few?

Let me assure you, I am a Jew and no one calls me when they have a military choice to make. A previous poster pointed out correctly there are some 13 million Jews in the world and over a billion each of Muslims and Christians. A post like yours, blaming Jews for ‘controling’ the US is so disturbing since it reads like something from the 1930’s.

It was a stroke of brilliance that this article was printed here since most of us who read the Tablet really have no idea of the hate for Jews that is out there, and the hate posters here clearly crawled from the sewer Smith’s article is trying to show us.

Thanks for the article, I took the time to read the comments here and check the blogs you reference, really terrible, I guess this is my wake up call.

Annasays:

July 23, 2010 - 10:23 am

I marched against the invasion with many Jews before the invasion. I am pointing out Jewish officials in government, congress and in powerful positions of influence. No way around this. Feith, Wolfowitz, Ros Lehtinen, Bill Kristol and many other Jewish people in positions of power were pushing hard for the invasion of Iraq. The Aipac “take action” section of that site was filled with a push for the invasion of Iraq And are now pushing hard for a military strike on Iran

Annasays:

July 23, 2010 - 10:27 am

Vered trying to divert and distract from the facts just does not work any longer. Aipac, Jinsa, Jewish congress people, the letters to both President Bush and President Clinton are filled with signatures of powerful Jewish officials who pushed for the invasion of Iraq. Trying to change the subject by associating the facts are somehow associated with the “Elders of Zion” is just another tactic that does not work any longer

Dannysays:

July 23, 2010 - 10:56 am

Anna, there are obviously some Jews who have pushed for war over the last decade and more. These people consider their policy proposals to be consistent with both U.S. and Israeli interests. Some of them were even in positions of influence (e.g., Feith, Wolfowitz). But it is simply absurd to claim that these people are somehow responsible for the security policies of three christian presidents, three christian vice presidents, five christian secretaries of defense, many Christian WH chiefs of staff and a Congress that is overwhelmingly dominated by christians. Bill Kristol’s existence was likely a negligible factor in GWB and Dick Cheney’s and Congress’s and THE AMERICAN PEOPLE’S decision to go to war.

I am disappointed in any fellow Jew who advocates for needless war, but that doesn’t mean I hold them responsible for the actions of our government. The people responsible for these wars sit in the oval office or head executive agencies or congressional committees. They VOTE FOR REPUBLICANS (sorry, it’s true). Aside from not being representative of Jews at large (any more than Richard Nixon was representative of Quakers or GWB of born-agains), the Jews you mention are simply not responsible for the decisions of the U.S. government. If you want to have a conversation about Bill Kristol, AIPAC, or whoever else, fine. They deserve to be called out for idiotic policy positions that advocate needless violence on a massive scale. But they don’t deserve nearly as much condemnation as the people who actually run our government, and the people who elect them.

Annasays:

July 23, 2010 - 11:29 am

“Danny says:
Jul 23, 2010 at 10:56 AM

Anna, there are obviously some Jews who have pushed for war over the last decade and more. These people consider their policy proposals to be consistent with both U.S. and Israeli interests. Some of them were even in positions of influence (e.g., Feith, Wolfowitz). But it is simply absurd to claim that these people are somehow responsible for the security policies of three christian presidents, three christian vice presidents, five christian secretaries of defense, many Christian WH chiefs of staff and a Congress that is overwhelmingly dominated by christians. Bill Kristol’s existence was likely a negligible factor in GWB and Dick Cheney’s and Congress’s and THE AMERICAN PEOPLE’S decision to go to war.”

Where did I say such a thing. Never said they were responsible for the invasion. But to say that they did not have a powerful influence is just a flat out lie.

Feith, Luti, Cambone, Ledeen played huge roles in producing, cherry picking and dessiminating the false pre war intelligence. Aipac members “Action” segment at that site was focused on supporting the invasion of Iraq for months if not a solid year. The letters that Kristol, Frum, Wurmsers etc signed trying to push both Clinton and Bush to invade Iraq had its influence. No way around this

Annasays:

July 23, 2010 - 11:31 am

All one has to do is read through the efforts of Lucchesi and others who attack the person, inflame, distract, attack instead of backing up what they say with facts etc and discussing legitimate concerns

Poyanisays:

July 23, 2010 - 11:51 am

It is amazing that Lee Smith’ argument, that bloggers like Greenwald are guilty of “Jew baiting”, is not based on the content of their writing, but rather by the comments left by posters on their site.

For every comment, denying the right of Israel to exist, there are ten stating that the “Muzzies” need to be exterminated and the the Arab sand-nig…s and “Palis” have no place in their homeland and should be subjugated to ethnic cleansing.

For every comment claiming Jews control the US and that New York and LA are Jewish cities, there are ten stating that Jordan is Palestine and that the Palestinians should be expelled and trucked like animals to there.

For every antisemitic stormfront website there are ten outright fascists Faith-Freedom websites, where Lee Smith’s racist political theories are gospel.

Funny how Lee Smith does not seem to see those.

To a white supremacist at stormfront, everyone seems like an anti-white racist. Perhaps Mr Smith suffers from the same mentality.

Dannysays:

July 23, 2010 - 11:59 am

Jeez. What’s a “powerful influence”? Does that mean their ideas were persuasive? Does it mean there was a quid pro quo for political or financial support? There were some people who had ideas that persuaded decisionmakers, or at the very least intersected with the decisionmakers’ own thinking. Whether these ideas were developed with the best of intentions doesn’t really matter, because the decisionmakers ratified those ideas in their respective independent capacities as elected representatives. I agree with you that this Smith article is a steaming pile of crap, but to claim that an intelligence community of over a million people was duped by some people at a thinktank who wrote some letters and reports is simply absurd. If that’s what you really believe, you’re better off spending your efforts imagining new ways to safeguard the US government against another attack by small groups of people with pen and paper and little by way of public station or responsibility.

Annasays:

July 23, 2010 - 1:14 pm

Great interview over at antiwar.com with Stephen Walt. Antiwar.com
Walt ” it is quite clear that some of the same groups and the same people who dreamed up the idea of going into Iraq in the first place way back in the late 90’s are now the loudest voices calling for a very hard line including the possibility of using military force against Iran.”

Same campaign going to be waged over the next six months

Annasays:

July 23, 2010 - 1:17 pm

Poyani all you have to do is go through the comments at this site. Lucchesi and others attack personally, inflame, divert from facts, information. Seldom back up any of their inflammatory claims. Not noticing that this strategy does not work any longer.

Stephen Walt’s interview over at Antiwar.com is so informative

Annasays:

July 23, 2010 - 1:21 pm

Danny far more than a think tank that influenced that decision. Confluence of neo theo oil cons combined. I lobby think thanks, the Office of Special Plans, Office of Net Assessment, White House Iraq Group, Israeli firster congress people, Wolfowitz/Cheney/Rumsfeld, Secret Cheney energy policy meetings, Project for a New American Century influence etc etc. An confluence of interest. And yes the I lobby, think tanks are a powerful influence

N. Joseph Pottssays:

July 23, 2010 - 3:06 pm

What I hate is bullets spewing from the muzzles of submachine guns wielded by soldiers driving people out of their ancestral homes. If that’s what these guys you write about hate, I’m with them 100%. And against you and everyone else who defends the ethnic cleansers.

1 independent voice in Cnn within the Television show. He has a really hard immigration law policy. This individual managed to graduate around the Harvard Higher education. Currently he has her one Airwaves Show. He don’t like that Nation chief executive.

Avner Steinsays:

July 23, 2010 - 6:14 pm

“I marched against the invasion with many Jews before the invasion. I am pointing out Jewish officials in government, congress and in powerful positions of influence. No way around this. Feith, Wolfowitz, Ros Lehtinen, Bill Kristol and many other Jewish people in positions of power were pushing hard for the invasion of Iraq. The Aipac “take action” section of that site was filled with a push for the invasion of Iraq And are now pushing hard for a military strike on Iran.”

American Arabs supported the Iraq War more than Jews.

AIPAC didn’t support or oppose the war until the war resolution was passed. This wasn’t a minority opinion.

Like someone else said this is just a continuation of the protocals of zion, placing the blame on the evil Joos and painting the Left as a victim to Jewish foreign policy.

ISRAEL as a STATE had no opinion on the war in Iraq. Our leadership (elected by AMERICAN CITIZENS) decided to invade Iraq. WE DID IT. Not ISRAELI JEWS. NOT AIPAC.

Take responsibility as an American. Leftist should be ashamed for how low they go.

Paul Freedmansays:

July 24, 2010 - 1:07 am

Shouldn’t the question of direct demonstrative action against known Jew-baiters and professional anti-Semites be on the table? They know what they are doing and they hate Jews.

Kathleensays:

July 24, 2010 - 11:20 am

Avner bullshit. I went to the Aipac site months before the invasion of Iraq. Their action center encouraged members to call Reps to support the invasion. Your claim is total bullshit. Aipac pushed for the invasion.

Just as they started pushing for more aggressive actions towards Iran soon after the invasion of Iraq

You Jews Should Be A Shamed My Father Is Creadel Jones From The Chi Lites Music You Help Kill Along With The Jewish Control Company You And Your Kind Created To Exploite Black Legendary Artist Singers Music Talent!!!!

You Dicuss Me And Every Intellegent Human Are Ailen Culture Creacher On Gods Earth Yes I Said Gods Jesues In Coming To Stop You And the Devil If You Dare Respond Go To Http:// ChiLites.Ning.Com You Are Liers And You Owe Me And Evry Legendary Black Entertainers You Stole From You Pack Of Thives And Devil Dogs!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

“Avner bullshit. I went to the Aipac site months before the invasion of Iraq. Their action center encouraged members to call Reps to support the invasion. Your claim is total bullshit. Aipac pushed for the invasion.”

Really, you went to the AIPAC summit?

How anecdotal.

Sounds concrete, empirical to me.

Considering AIPAC is run by hard-core liberal Jews and not neo-conservatives. AIPAC never supported foreign intervention in muslim states, support for the iraq war grew independent of israel and jew lobby.

take responsibility for your actions. too easy to blame the jews for your mess.

what if the iraq war turned out well? would you blame aipac then?

Gary Williamssays:

July 24, 2010 - 8:21 pm

I read through these comments and what immediately stands out is the vast disparity in factual integrity between the items used in defense of the article and those opposed. One has to wonder if the difference stems out of a failure by some to have made the connection between whether or not a particular point of view is even worth advancing if one is forced to make things up to do it? Avner….?

Because surely you must know that the old and long-since revised editions of most websites – including AIPAC and PNAC – are archived and still easily retrievable from several large servers(and yes…that IS the meaning of “empirical”).

But more to the point, if I give you the links to their articles/versions advancing the Iraq War, will you quote them when explaining the discrepancy between what is said by them and what you deny they said here?

Avner Steinsays:

July 24, 2010 - 8:28 pm

“But more to the point, if I give you the links to their articles/versions advancing the Iraq War, will you quote them when explaining the discrepancy between what is said by them and what you deny they said here?”

AIPAC had no role in the planning of the Iraq/Afghanistan war.

After the war began, yeah AIPAC – along with dozen of other lobby movements, mostly defense industry, supported by the war.

Hillary Clinton and numerous other liberals supported the war.

At the time no one singled out the Jewish groups because most American Jews opposed the conflict.

AIPAC, more often than not, supports American foreign policy either way. They don’t fight with Arab oil except when it comes to aid to the Palestinians.

You are inferring that AIPAC played a special role in drumming up the war in Iraq. But an absence of AIPAC would change nothing – the war would have still happened.

Ariel Sharon himself didn’t understand why the US was invading Iraq. Israeli intelligence didn’t see Iraq or Saddam as a threat to Israel territory. Iran was the threat. Sharon said this over and over again.

But Israel can’t afford to pick fights with the US (unlike Europe) so when the invasion was green-lighted they agreed to train US soldiers in Gaza/West Bank to prepare them for insurgency conflicts and the strategies of terrorists.

The AIPAC scandal was debunked long ago.

Eddiesays:

July 25, 2010 - 1:14 pm

Let’s not forget the FAKE “anti-war” movement.

When have you ever seen an “anti-war” march denouncing osama bin laden, al qada, saddam hussein, the islamofascist regime of iran?

Hershlsays:

July 26, 2010 - 6:59 am

I wonder why so much news is not even reported in our media?

Consider this:

Saudi Arabia, the center of the Islam, has now created a government-run SMS system, funded by the taxpayers, which keeps tabs on women. The SMS messages are automatically relayed to the husband so that he can figure out where his property has strayed. Women are legally classified as property in the Koran along with cattle, slaves- Saudi Arabia refuses to sign the anti-slavery conventions since Islam approves of slavery-, goats, and other goods that may be bought and traded. It is important in Islam, where a man can have many wives, cattle and goats, to know if his durable goods are on the loose.

I wonder if the Western leftist, anti-America, anti-Israel rabble are ready to allow their masters to receive SMS messages when they stray? If it’s good enough for their Muslim heroes, I assume that it’s good enough for them, too.

I’ve read Sullivan for years, and portraying him as an enabler of anti-semitism, or worse, an anti-semite, just doesn’t wash. Nor is Christopher Hitchens a Holocaust denial enabler as Max Blumenthal lableled him some years ago.

Going on the reasonable assumption that people who are very sensitive to criticism about Israel may occasionally irrationally leap to the conclusion that anti-semitism is behind that criticism, and that people who have formerly hidden, or came recently to anti-semitic beliefs also exist, how does one determine the truth? What are the specific signs that would convince someone that Sullivan et. al harbor anti-semitic beliefs? How does one distinguish that from simple insensitivity? Is it a “I know it when I see it” type knowledge, or are there a signals and signs which are clear indicators? Under what circumstances would criticism specifically directed against Israeli policies, attitudes or influence be justified without raising the specter of anti-semitism? What are the parameters of legitimate discourse in your opinion?

Eddiesays:

July 26, 2010 - 2:27 pm

max blumenthal is an imbecile and useful idiot.

Google his father sidney blumenthal for more on the familial inherited mental illness.

Hershl, is your IQ so diminished that you think those who criticize Israeli policies must ipso facto love Saudi Arabia’s?

shimkesays:

July 27, 2010 - 4:59 pm

I am amazed and disappointed by the level of discourse here, on both sides of the issue. There is no serious discussion of at least one of the fundamental issues here: what is anti-Semitism? Just statements on the one side that so and so is anti-Semitic because he is anti-Israel (against its policies? its governemnt? some of its actions? its very right to exist? the innate morality / immorality of Israelis or Jews?). If you don’t know what you’re talking about its hard to have a meaningful discussion. — and on the other side that Israel committed this or that injustice, that certain American Jews argued in favor of policies the letter-writer does not like. No one on this side has tried to show that this represents Jewish opinion, or that this current of opinion is more prevalent among American Jews than non-Jews. Remember, the article was about anti-Semitism. I see no concrete discussion in it or in comments defending it, or indeed in those attacking the article, of the difference between anti-Semitism and criticising a person or country that “happens to be Jewish”. It all just seems like a sophist debate based on mere words rather than an attempt to hone one’s thinking.

Dorothy Wachsstocksays:

July 28, 2010 - 7:40 am

If only we Jews owned the media as accused, we would have no anti-semitism.

Doesn’t all of this anti-semitism prove that we, Jews, do not?

Disgusted with the J Street Jews, and all the others who do not unite to fight but join in as we see the young Jewish girls and boys that go to Public Schools march with those against Israel.

If we had the state of Israel in the 1930’s there would be no 6 million jews dead.

Marina Sapirsays:

February 6, 2013 - 7:58 pm

Many Jews, like you, worry so much about the impression that we own the media, that they would be happy to let anti-Semites have their way, just to prove we are not so powerful. This is what happened in Nazi Germany, this is what is happening now in USA.

Eddiesays:

July 28, 2010 - 12:39 pm

Derek Smuggs, those ONLY criticize Israel, and never have a harsh word about muslim only cities like mecca, SA which routinely cuts off the hands of “thieves”, which treats women like second class citizens, which funds wahabbist schools in Infidel lands whilst prohibiting even a single church, temple, synagogue, open display of a non-muslim religious symbol anywhere in SA, or release the bomber of Pan Am 103 for oil contracts, must ipso facto love islamofascism.

I was disappointed that the piece did not provide more specifics about the positions of the enemies of Israel that were cited. that the thesis of the article is correct seems beyond dispute. mindless, reflexive, relentless hatred of Israel is a type of corruption that has been insinuated into academic life and the electronic and print media. a disappointingly unexceptional comment in J. Toobin’s article in the current New Yorker on Sen. Schumer illustrates the point. Toobin referred to the senator’s “reflexive” support for Israel (Toobin wrote, “the Israeli government”) “including after its recent assault on the Turkish aid flotilla to Gaza…” imagine that! “including after its recent assualt…” well, I guess that just about says it all. because its clear to an earnest and complacent fool like Toobin that that “assualt” should have ended any support for Israel. I never cared much for Toobin and but it’s clear that this fool is smart enough to know that the Turkish effort was not about aid. and he is smart enough to know that hostility purportedly directed at the government of Israel is all about subverting support for Israel.

Davidsays:

July 29, 2010 - 2:13 am

The real hatred in this ongoing pasquinade is by the arch Jews and Israel-right-or-wrong crowd for the Jews who have the audacity to criticize Israel, a nation no longer beyond reproach.

MarcHsays:

July 29, 2010 - 8:38 am

Lee – I would enjoy reading a companion essay on how “Neo-Conservative” went from a neutral definition of an intellectual trend or , at most, a loose group of policy intellectuals who developed a broad spectrum of Reganite foreign and domestic policies to a code word for a Jewish conspiracy.

“As far back as 2003, David Brooks, writing in the Weekly Standard, was among the first to note the resurgence of anti-Semitism” –

In March 2003, pastor John Hagee (later to found Christians United For Israel) gave a sermon – that was broadcast around the world on Christian networks – in which Hagee claimed European Rothschild bankers controlled the US economy through the Federal Reserve. The ADL calls that particular conspiracy theory a “Classic Anti-Semitic Myth”.

This has to be an example of the worst kind of pro-Israel propaganda. Worthy of the kind found in Germany a long time ago. It is a verbal trip from the “adult content site” through the “open sewer” to the “cesspool”. Save us from writers who have to resort to potty-mouth to strengthen their argument.

My favorite part of Lee Smith’s piece are his quotations of comments from Shingo and Cal and others. He didn’t use comments from Cretin and Moron and Sap because he figured we’d draw some inference from their names.

Also, isn’t there a possibility that Lee Smith could write comments himself under a nom d’net and the use them to make his point?

The gulf oil spill is surely one of the most terrible diasters of the 21st century. While the attack of 9/11 was constrained within that relatively small space of ground zero, this oil spill has effects all the way out across the sea, impacting innocent animals, many miles of the southern coast and also local tourism and other industry. I honestly hope that this atrocity is solved as best as is possible.

love thissays:

July 31, 2010 - 4:29 pm

Hat off to Lee Smith for his thought provoking analysis that puts into context the bloggers i call the Haters … nothing that israel will ever do or has done is worth any positive recongniton to them, they claim to be honest but they are delusional, they are anti semitic haters. Israelis have learned to ignore their background noise of anti semitism that is posted daily as smith points out. So when supposedly, and i say supposedly because the Washington Post’s credibilty after trying to sell access to the White House is need of deparate repair, would provide the forum for some the most vocal anti semites. The Pat Buchannan crowd has gone intellectual. Used to be only white tash like
David Duke engaged this but now Harvard and the Washington Post do.

Me, i couldn’t care less. Israel will never win the Pr debate and it is simply a matter of numbers .. 1.5 billion arabs vs 15 million Jews.

the Suropeans have mor emuslim immigrants than all of Israle .. lucky them

TheDevilCanDancesays:

July 31, 2010 - 11:11 pm

Selective indignation…, I would to hear the same amount of outrage directed at what Zionists have stated throughout history. The root cause of Antisemitism, Zionists insisted, was the Jews’ exile existence. Jews lived parasitically off their “hosts”. The tenet of Zionism was shelilat ha’galut (the Negation of the Diaspora).

1935 American Ben Frommer, writer for the ultraright Zionist-Revisionists, could declare of no less than 16 million of his fellow Jews that: “The fact is undeniable that the Jews collectively are unhealthy and neurotic. Those professional Jews who, wounded to the quick, indignantly deny this truth are the greatest enemies of their race, for they thereby lead them to search for false solutions, or at most palliatives”.

I could go on and cite Zionists quotes for hours…, but it is so simple and easy to blame the Goy for all the issues that the Jewish community doesn’t want to address.

Gary Williamssays:

August 2, 2010 - 11:27 am

Hershl betrays a hallmark attribute of the RWA=SDO personality, that being a tendency to see the world in simplistic B&W, Us vs Them, good vs evil, “With us, or agin’ us” ways that do not threaten to confuse or complicate what they already believe is all they really need to know about a given matter. Simplistic labeling of others using racist, sexist, or other demeaning names give an easily confused person a way they can avoid having to deal with life’s not-so-simple problems. Indeed it is even required by those with a diminished ability to think in the nuanced complexities that recognition of most of life’s more subtle influences must inherently demand of any wise and and/or intelligent individual.

If anyone feels the need to defend their own conservative views that claim being anti-Likud or anti-Zionist belief must conflate to anti-Semitism, pick one of the above for your rant. I’m done with you.

lovelyisraelissays:

August 4, 2010 - 3:02 am

Lee Smith is right about 1 thing.

Hatred of Israel has indeed entered the mainstream.

Just as it took awhile for humanity to comprehend the wickedness of the German Nazis, it has taken a long time for humanity to confront the Israeli racist contagion.

That’s called progress, Lee..you vile coward and apologist for murder.

Eddiesays:

August 7, 2010 - 2:33 pm

Too bad for islamofascists and their infidel friends, that the Israelis are NOT the unarmed Jews of WW2 nazi infested europe.

The fact that islamofascists can’t defeat the Israelis is what islamofascists call a NAKBA.

HAPPY NAKBA islamofascists, and may you have many, many more!

P. scg.,says:

August 13, 2010 - 6:54 pm

It is disheartening to read so much vile and mindless prose. The writer who masquerades as “lovelyisraelis” is a case in point. Shame on you.

Hi there just wanted to give you a quick heads up. The text in your article seem to be running off the screen in Ie. I’m not sure if this is a formatting issue or something to do with browser compatibility but I thought I’d post to let you know. The layout look great though! Hope you get the issue fixed soon. Kudos

The article is very useful, and that writing style of the novelist is dazzling. I get pleasure from every minute as i read this. It is basically well worth to read the paper. You will study from it. A good read.

I precisely had to thank you so much again. I do not know what I would’ve undertaken in the absence of the entire aspects contributed by you on such a topic. It was a terrifying case in my position, however , looking at your professional style you processed it took me to jump with gladness. I’m just happier for this work and even pray you know what a great job you’re putting in educating people today via your web blog. More than likely you haven’t got to know any of us.

The subsequent time I read a weblog, I hope that it doesnt disappoint me as a lot as this one. I mean, I do know it was my option to learn, however I truly thought youd have one thing fascinating to say. All I hear is a bunch of whining about one thing that you may repair in case you werent too busy looking for attention.

I feel this is one of the so much important information for me. And i’m happy studying your article. However wanna commentary on few basic things, The site taste is perfect, the articles is actually excellent :D. Excellent activity, cheers.

Thank you intended for any other excellent article. Where more may anyone receive of which kind of information in such a perfect manner connected with publishing? I have some sort of speech next full week, in addition to I am at the look for like information.

Its like you read my mind! You seem to know so much about this, like you wrote the book in it or something. I think that you can do with a few pics to drive the message home a little bit, but other than that, this is excellent blog. A fantastic read. I will certainly be back.

I currently have read the article. It’s genuinely helpful. We can certainly benefit considerably from it. Fluent writing style and vivid text make united states readers benefit from reading. I is going to share a person’s opinions together with my good friends.

Thanks so much for giving everyone an extraordinarily terrific opportunity to read critical reviews from this site. It can be so cool and as well , jam-packed with a lot of fun for me and my office mates to visit the blog the equivalent of 3 times weekly to see the latest issues you have got. And definitely, we’re actually astounded considering the gorgeous tactics you serve. Some 2 areas in this article are in reality the finest we’ve ever had.

Throughout the great pattern of things you’ll receive a B+ for effort. Where you actually confused me personally ended up being in all the details. You know, as the maxim goes, the devil is in the details… And it couldn’t be more correct in this article. Having said that, permit me reveal to you precisely what did work. Your text is pretty powerful which is most likely why I am making the effort in order to comment. I do not make it a regular habit of doing that. Next, although I can certainly see the leaps in reason you come up with, I am not sure of exactly how you appear to unite the details which in turn help to make the actual final result. For the moment I shall subscribe to your position however hope in the near future you connect your dots better.

I think this is one of the most vital information for me. And i’m glad reading your article. But should remark on few general things, The web site style is great, the articles is really great : D. Good job, cheers

I precisely needed to thank you so much all over again. I’m not certain what I would’ve sorted out without these creative ideas provided by you regarding such a situation. This has been a real hard issue in my circumstances, but discovering a new skilled fashion you treated that forced me to cry over contentment. I am just happier for the support as well as hope you comprehend what an amazing job you are carrying out instructing the mediocre ones with the aid of your website. I’m certain you’ve never met all of us.

Thanks for the thoughts you have discussed here. In addition, I believe usually there are some factors that will keep your automobile insurance premium straight down. One is, to contemplate buying cars that are in the good report on car insurance organizations. Cars which are expensive tend to be more at risk of being stolen. Aside from that insurance is also in accordance with the value of your truck, so the more costly it is, then higher the actual premium you only pay.

I am just commenting to make you be aware of of the magnificent discovery my cousin’s princess had visiting your blog. She came to understand a good number of things, with the inclusion of what it’s like to have a great coaching heart to let the mediocre ones clearly have an understanding of some grueling subject matter. You truly exceeded visitors’ expectations. I appreciate you for showing the beneficial, dependable, edifying and in addition unique tips on that topic to Evelyn.

Hi I am so glad I found your webpage, I really found you by mistake, while I was browsing on Yahoo for something else, Regardless I am here now and would just like to say thank you for a remarkable post and a all round enjoyable blog (I also love the theme/design), I don’t have time to look over it all at the moment but I have saved it and also included your RSS feeds, so when I have time I will be back to read more, Please do keep up the excellent work.

My husband and i have been absolutely fortunate when Edward managed to round up his inquiry through the ideas he obtained when using the weblog. It’s not at all simplistic to simply always be giving freely information that the others may have been making money from. We really fully understand we’ve got the website owner to give thanks to for that. The main illustrations you have made, the straightforward web site navigation, the friendships you will aid to promote – it’s got many spectacular, and it is facilitating our son and the family believe that that content is excellent, which is pretty vital. Thank you for the whole thing!

Why didnt I think about this? I hear exactly what youre saying and Im so happy that I came across your blog. You really know what youre talking about, and you made me feel like I should learn more about this. Thanks for this; Im officially a huge fan of your blog

I do not even know how I stopped up here, nonetheless I believed this post used to be fantastic. I do not recognize who you’re but certainly you are going to a well-known blogger really should you might be not already Cheers!

Hey There. I found your blog using msn. This is a very well written article. I will be sure to bookmark it and return to read more of your useful information. Thanks for the post. I will definitely return.

Zune and iPod: Most people compare the Zune to the Touch, but after seeing how slim and surprisingly small and light it is, I consider it to be a rather unique hybrid that combines qualities of both the Touch and the Nano. It’s very colorful and lovely OLED screen is slightly smaller than the touch screen, but the player itself feels quite a bit smaller and lighter. It weighs about 2/3 as much, and is noticeably smaller in width and height, while being just a hair thicker.

Hello there, just became aware of your blog through Google, and found that it is really informative. I will appreciate if you continue this in future. Many people will benefit from your writing. Cheers!

I admire the valuable information you offer in your articles. I will bookmark your blog and have my children check up here often. I am quite sure they will learn lots of new stuff here than anybody else! Business Blog

I was curious if you ever considered changing the page layout of your website? Its very well written; I love what youve got to say. But maybe you could a little more in the way of content so people could connect with it better. Youve got an awful lot of text for only having 1 or two images. Maybe you could space it out better?

Greetings from Los angeles!
I’m bored to death at work so I decided to check out
[url=http://somallxperienceblog.com/3202/soma-fabrications-smoothie-es-road-frame/]soma fabrications es[/url] [url=http://somallxperienceblog.com/60/buy-generic-soma-online-no-rx-texas/]soma online in texas[/url] [url=http://somallxperienceblog.com/761/who-sells-the-cheapest-on-line-soma-use-can-increase-running-distance/]who sells the cheapest on line soma use can increase running distance[/url] [url=http://somallxperienceblog.com/105/buy-soma-overnight-louisiana/]overnight soma to louisiana[/url] [url=http://somallxperienceblog.com/791/get-cheap-does-soma-cause-birth-defects/]can somas cause birth defects [/url]
your site on my iphone during lunch break.
I enjoy the info you provide here and can’t wait to take a look when I get home.
I’m amazed at how fast your blog loaded on my cell phone .. I’m not even using WIFI, just 3G .. Anyhow, wonderful blog!

Thanks for every other excellent article. Where else may just anybody get that kind of information in such a perfect method of writing? I have a presentation next week, and I’m at the look for such information.

I’m also writing to make you be aware of what a helpful encounter my girl encountered viewing the blog. She came to find lots of things, not to mention what it is like to possess an awesome teaching mood to let others quite simply comprehend specific complex matters. You undoubtedly surpassed her expectations. Many thanks for rendering these practical, trusted, edifying not to mention fun tips on the topic to Lizeth.

I precisely wished to thank you very much yet again. I am not sure the things that I would have created in the absence of the entire tactics revealed by you concerning my situation. Entirely was a real frightful matter in my opinion, but observing the professional way you dealt with it forced me to cry over gladness. I’m happier for the advice and then trust you know what a great job you are always doing instructing the others through your site. I am sure you have never met all of us.

i’m not used to the new Yahoo! Pulse that comes with your email. i like blogging though…and i don’t know how to change the blog settings to make your posts invisible to everyone except you and stuff. help please DX.

I loved as much as you’ll receive carried out right here. The sketch is attractive, your authored subject matter stylish. nonetheless, you command get bought an impatience over that you wish be delivering the following. unwell unquestionably come more formerly again since exactly the same nearly a lot often inside case you shield this increase.

I love your blog.. very nice colors & theme. Did you design this website yourself or did you hire someone to do it for you? Plz respond as I’m looking to construct my own blog and would like to find out where u got this from. thanks a lot

There are few fascinating second limits in this article I don’t cognise if I see all of them mid to spirit. There may be whatever rigour nonetheless I gift accept opinion exchequer I appear into it more. Morality article , thanks and we essential unnecessary! Extra to FeedBurner as comfortably

Hello, Neat post. There’s an issue together with your site in internet explorer, could check this… IE still is the market leader and a large section of folks will leave out your fantastic writing because of this problem.

Thanks for your posting. I would like to comment that the very first thing you will need to do is verify if you really need fixing credit. To do that you will need to get your hands on a duplicate of your credit score. That should really not be difficult, since government makes it necessary that you are allowed to acquire one free copy of your credit report per year. You just have to request that from the right men and women. You can either look into the website for that Federal Trade Commission or perhaps contact one of the main credit agencies directly.

This is really great content. Thanks a lot with this. I use it my website to also find latest gaming and technology news and reviews . I linked to your website and bookmarked it so i could visit your new posts.

I have noticed that over the course of building a relationship with real estate proprietors, you’ll be able to come to understand that, in every single real estate financial transaction, a payment is paid. Ultimately, FSBO sellers never “save” the commission rate. Rather, they fight to earn the commission by means of doing the agent’s job. In doing this, they devote their money in addition to time to complete, as best they are able to, the tasks of an broker. Those responsibilities include disclosing the home through marketing, offering the home to all buyers, building a sense of buyer desperation in order to prompt an offer, organizing home inspections, taking on qualification investigations with the bank, supervising fixes, and assisting the closing.

Thanks for one’s marvelous posting! I actually enjoyed reading it, you happen to be a great author.I will be sure to bookmark your blog and definitely will come back in the foreseeable future. I want to encourage one to continue your great work, have a nice weekend!

Woah! I’m really enjoying the template/theme of this website. It’s simple, yet effective. A lot of times it’s difficult to get that “perfect balance” between usability and visual appeal. I must say you’ve done a very good job with this. Additionally, the blog loads extremely quick for me on Chrome. Excellent Blog!

Howdy, have you ever pondered to write regarding Nintendo or PS handheld?

Gordie377says:

November 30, 2011 - 10:15 am

I intended to put you that bit of word to say thank you the moment again relating to the breathtaking solutions you have provided on this website. It has been quite remarkably generous with you to give unreservedly what a number of us would’ve distributed as an electronic book in making some cash for themselves, precisely considering that you could have done it if you ever wanted. The thoughts also worked to become a fantastic way to be certain that some people have the same interest the same as my very own to know a good deal more regarding this condition. I know there are lots of more enjoyable sessions ahead for individuals that take a look at your blog.

hello there im a female from europe, i come across this weblog from good friend in bing its reely awesome personally thank you for this work whilst still being working like that usually;). therefore if somone demand a help about dating
inside piratage or hackermsn pay a visit to my web site and i will bublish this blog in my site. for this kind of site only simply because its very good pic
and also
shades

The Israeli supporters predictably come out to offer their enthusiastic support for a massacre in Gaza that has sickened the entire world. Such filth are themselves the leading source of anti-Semitism today.

ironysays:

January 14, 2012 - 4:06 am

Wow 384 comments about Jew hating. These numbers suggest that the purpose of this site is to act as a magnet for the animus of a readership hostile not only to Israel but also to American figures friendly to Israel, especially American Jews.

I’ve been exploring for a little bit for any high-quality articles or blog posts in this kind of area . Exploring in Yahoo I ultimately stumbled upon this web site. Reading this info So i am satisfied to show that I’ve an incredibly excellent uncanny feeling I discovered exactly what I needed. I most definitely will make certain to don’t omit this website and provides it a look on a constant basis.

hizmuttsays:

December 11, 2013 - 5:59 pm

People are developing an aversion to Israel because it has become the genocide machine it complains of being a victim of. People are more keenly aware of the Israel response to everything – Whine like unreasonable babies, then kill everything in sight with not a shred of respect for humanity at large. Israel is a social cancer and must be destroyed.

Davidsays:

December 12, 2013 - 4:02 pm

Sorry, but how can you accuse a number of writers of antisemitism without providing a single example to support your claim. You present no evidence at all of Sullivan, Walt, Greenwald’s or Weiss’a alleged ‘Jew-baiting’. All you do is damn them by association, by noting that their blogs on Israel attract lots of antisemitic comments. But anything on the internet about Israel attracts antisemitic comments. That doesn’t make the authors antisemites.

Name (required)Email (required, will not be published)Website (optional)

Message

2000

Your comment may be no longer than 2,000 characters, approximately 400 words. HTML tags are not permitted, nor are more than two URLs per comment. We reserve the right to delete inappropriate comments.